Commons Chamber

Wednesday 25th June 2025

(began 7 months, 1 week ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:34
None Portrait Oral questions: Science, Innovation and Technology
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. Order. Order.
11:35
None Portrait Q1. What steps his Department is taking to improve the distribution of high speed internet provision. (904803)
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order. Order. We Order. Order. We start Order. Order. We start with questions to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology.
11:35
11:35
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:38
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:44
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:54
Chris Bryant Portrait Chris Bryant MP, Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology) (Rhondda and Ogmore, Labour)
-
-
I talked about the creative industries issue as part of the bid last week at the point was made that Belfast is a great sector for innovation and creative dishes but that must extend throughout the whole of Northern Ireland and that whole of Northern Ireland and that point is well made. -- Creative industries. The digital action plan is something The digital action plan is something I am proud of and this morning I was I am proud of and this morning I was able to lodge the IT Reuse for Good Charter because one thing that is Charter because one thing that is problematic for many families is they don't have a device and so I they don't have a device and so I would urge every person in the House to get every business to sign up for to get every business to sign up for the charter to get the bases to be people that really need them.

-- people that really need them. -- Devices. Digital exclusion and inclusion can vary widely between households and communities. Often it households and communities. Often it affects low income, rural and affects low income, rural and coastal communities, with them left behind. What steps are taken to ensure the Labour action plan reaches all communities, equipping reaches all communities, equipping everyone with the tools that they need? Strong point. We must get into every community and to have a digital government, we must have a digital nation and we cannot have some excluded from that.

That is why we have announced £600 million for the Innovation Fund this year and I hope local authorities have innovative ideas to break down the barriers to digital inclusion. barriers to digital inclusion. Topicals, starting with Patrick Hurley.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Department is determined to make the UK the best place in the world for science and technology. world for science and technology. The Spending Review admitted it is £6 billion last week to R&D, enabling every aspect of the tech economy to fire on all cylinders and republish the Digital and Technology Sector Plan as part of the Industrial Plant backing quantum,
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:01
12:01
12:03
12:03
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:13
12:14
12:14
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:18
12:18
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:23
12:24
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:33
12:34
12:34
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:39
12:39
Maria Eagle Portrait Rt Hon Maria Eagle MP, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Liverpool Garston, Labour)
-
-
Thank you Mr Speaker. The UK will purchase 12 new F-35A fighter jets, and join NATO's dual capable aircraft mission in a major boost for national security. The Prime Minister has announced at the NATO summit that the UK intends to buy at least a dozen of the dual capable aircraft which can carry both nuclear and conventional weapons. The NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has said this morning the UK has declared its nuclear deterrent to NATO for many decades, I strongly welcome today's announcement that the UK will now also joined NATO's nuclear mission and procure the F- 35A.

The decision will support 20,000 jobs in the F-35 program in the UK with 15% of the global supply chain for the Jets based in Britain supporting Haile's jobs and opportunities for working people and delivering a defence dividend across the country. The announcement responds to two recommendations in the Strategic Defence Review, recommendation 30, and recommendation 46, that the UK commenced discussions on the potential benefits and feasibility of enhanced participation in NATO's nuclear mission. And about the mix of F-35 a and B.

It also reintroduces a nuclear role for the Royal Air Force for the first time as the UK retired its sovereign L launched nuclear following the end of the Cold War. The U.K.'s commitment to NATO is unquestionable, as is the alliance contribution to keeping the UK safe and secure. We must all step up to protect the Euro-Atlantic area for generations to come.
12:41
James Cartlidge Portrait James Cartlidge MP (South Suffolk, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you for granting this UQ. You will recall that the government planned announcement today to secure F-35A's was briefly covered in the Sunday Times newspaper the day before the STI was published. We received no meaningful answers at all, and I hope the blister can be more forthcoming today. I wrote in the Express on 24 May that our nuclear forces needed to be even more resilient including potentially by diversifying and methods for delivering nuclear strike. The reason for this is that we have to recognise the threat posed by Russia in particular, and its ability to operate nuclear weapons at tactical and theatre levels, to deter effectively, we must be able to do the same.

In principle I welcome this announcement have the following questions. What if the anticipated in-service date for the F-35 as? Will they in-service or that we occurring after delivery? We know they will be ordered instead of F- 35Bs, but will the government still order the remaining F-35Bs as planned? How will they be refuelled given that the current operational sovereignty issues, we are committed to a strong military partnership with United States given this is about diversity of delivery, has the Department given any thought to additional tactical options where we have greater industrial input, i.e.

Storm Shadow typhoon? Ironically it was Lord Robertson as defence secretary in 1998 who removed our last Air Force nuclear capabilities and it is noteworthy that as one of the authors of the SDR, he said to the select committee that they the authors were "Not terribly enthusiastic about it. " On this side of the house, we wholeheartedly back in nuclear deterrence. Doesn't this show why we need a robust plan to get to 3% on defence in this Parliament rather than Labour's smoke and mirrors plan a lack of fully funded planning to properly reach defence spending? reach defence spending?
12:43
12:44
12:45
12:46
12:47
12:48
12:49
12:50
12:50
12:51
12:51
12:52
12:53
12:53
12:53
12:54
12:54
12:55
12:56
12:56
12:57
12:58
12:58
12:59
13:00
13:00
13:00
13:01
13:01
13:02
13:02
13:03
13:04
13:04
13:05
13:05
13:06
13:06
13:07
13:08
13:08
13:08
13:09
13:09
13:10
13:11
13:11
13:13
13:13
13:13
13:14
13:15
13:15
13:15
13:16
13:17
13:17
13:18
13:18
13:19
13:20
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:23
13:23
13:23
13:24
13:25
13:26
13:27
13:28
Richard Tice Portrait Richard Tice MP (Boston and Skegness, Reform UK)
-
-
the Ten Minute Rule Motion and we have got Richard Tice.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to move that leave be given in this House to bring in a Bill to make provision for the general public to require and petition that public to require and petition that the criminal cases review commission should review cases where petitioners believe sentences handed petitioners believe sentences handed down our either too lenient or too harsh and also make provision for the review of such sentences and make provision for the referral of make provision for the referral of such cases by the Commission to the Court of Appeal, or the Supreme Court of Appeal, or the Supreme Court.

And for connected purposes. Before looking at the provisions, I Before looking at the provisions, I would ask you to join me in a journey of imagination to a respected distant democracy with an elected leader, an independent judiciary, respected, and a judiciary, respected, and a respected legal system, and where there has historically been confidence amongst the people of the democracy for this judicial and legal system. Then imagine a bad legal system. Then imagine a bad event occurs and the elected leader of that distant democracy effectively instructs the judiciary to impose the harshest of possible sentences on potential transgressors.

The consequence of which is that... Imagine someone in a fit of anger puts out an offensive, inappropriate bad tweet for of yours, comes down, apologises, and withdraws that online and tweet. But then, because of that, they are charged and sentenced in a very serious way. Potentially a sentence of 31 months, that may be significantly more than the sentence given to a shoplifter, rubber, mugger, drug dealer, and the like. -- robber.

The thing about confidence in the legal system is the comparison of sentences and so imagine that the individual, whilst in prison, is allegedly the recipient of some violent maltreatment in prison, including being manhandled to the ground, handcuffed, to the point where bruises are significantly present five days later on their hands. Imagine them being dragged out up by three flights of stairs to the wing for naughty girls, having been a prisoner who was promised to be taken to be good girls when.

This is the consequence in a distant democracy where you think this cannot be valid but, with regret, I must bring you back to the reality of the situation, that this is the UK and in the last few months this UK and in the last few months this That is why I bring this coming bill to the House under the Ten Minute Rule Bill. It is known outside of this House as Lucy's bill. Because confidence in our judicial system and the sentences that are handed out is absolutely vital.

I believe the public, they want to trust our system but justice works when it is natural and fair and decent and the public believe sentences are appropriate. If we lose that then potentially we lose everything. We are all human, even noble experienced, wise judges can get things wrong. And there is a system of appeal. It may be what we need Mr Speaker and that is why the provisions of this bill are so important, maybe the public would have evermore confidence in a vibrant democracy, in our justice system if there was like a system of a troubled check safeguard of the sentences.

So that without being able to hinge on the original judgement that is following a case but actually let's say Mr Speaker, 500 members of the public, if they signed a petition to ask the Criminal Cases Review Commission of to reconsider the sentence and if they felt within eight weeks that sentence may be too lenient or too harsh, they could then refer it to an appropriate course. I think that would give an extra level of trust and confidence in the fairness and the comparative appropriateness of sentences within our system.

The sentences within our system. The responses I believe -- the response is I believe Mr Speaker, people would believe this is a democracy and justice system which works for all. With the appropriate safeguards. It is for that reason Mr Speaker, I bring this bill to the House. And I believe it is worthy of further debate, consideration and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

discussion. Thank you. The honourable member have leave

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. The question is the honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Aye". Of the contrary, "No". The ayes have it. contrary, "No". The ayes have it. The ayes have it. He will prepare and bring in the bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and bring in the bill? Mr Speaker, Nigel Farage, Lee Anderson, several poaching, James

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Criminal Criminal Cases Criminal Cases Review Criminal Cases Review (Public

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Petition) Bill. Second Reading what day? Friday, 11 July for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friday, 11 July. We now come to the motion on the estimate for the the motion on the estimate for the Ministry of Justice. I called the Minister to move the motion formerly.
13:35
13:36
Andy Slaughter Portrait Andy Slaughter MP (Hammersmith and Chiswick, Labour)
-
-
capacity, coupled with the backlog in the Crown courts in over 74,000 cases. Investment and reform required. The Ministry of Justice suffer some of the most severe budget cuts of any department during the years of Tory austerity. In 2023/24 its resource expenditure level was 11% less than it had been in 2010/11 in real terms. I would therefore like to welcome the Labour government investment in the criminal justice system and now through the Main Estimates Act also through the spending review.

The main Estimates confirmed the MoJ day-to-day spending is set to increase by 793 million, or 6.5%. Which includes further investment in the prisons and probation service and in the Courts and Tribunals Service. The MoJ investment capital spending also said to increase by 351 million or over 20%. Largely driven by investment in creating new prison places and major projects maintain port capacity and invest in digital systems and securities. The Spending Review also announced the following. £7 billion were allocated between 2024 and 25 and 2029 to 2030 to support the delivery of 14,000 urgently needed new prison places by 2031.

An increase of up to 700 million per year for the Probation Service by 2028/29. Compared with 2025/26. This is especially important given the recommendations made by David talks Independent Sentencing Review which I will come unto any moment. And up to 450 million per year in additional investment in the Court system by 2028/29 aimed at increasing Crown courts sitting days. And implementing the forthcoming recommendations from Sir Brian Everson's Independent Review on the courts. Which is set to deliver its first report next month.

Combining the estimates and Spending Review presents a large positive picture for investment in the MoJ. The Estimates free resource expenditure in 25/26 is 14% more than the spending plan for 2024/25. This increase may help to offset some of the underfunding the Department was subject to in the 2010s. The estimates for capital expenditure in 25/26 is 32% more than the plans for the year 24/25. This will be a record high level of capital spending to the MoJ -- expenditure for the MoJ over the course of the financial year.

It remains to be seen whether this funding will be enough to address the challenges of the criminal justice system faces -- that the criminal justice system faces. Due to time I will focus my speech on the three key areas, prison Reformation, the courts and legal aid. His Majesty Prison and Probation Service, HMPPS is the largest body within the MoJ in terms of expenditure. It makes up 47% of the MoJ's day-to-day spending budget. And in the 25/26 will make up 82% of its planned capital spending.

The prison population is more than doubled over the last 30 years. And it stands at around 88,000. It continues to grow year- on-year and is a record high. If wings continue as they are the prison population will be 93.5 thousand by September 2026. And over 100,000 by September 2028. For which there will not be sufficient places. The MoJ cites the following increases, increasing police charging activity and ability to put them in the courts. Ability to remand will now make up an astonishing 20% of the prison publishing.

The changes in sentencing policy which keep the more serious offenders in prison for much longer, I welcome the Lord Chancellor's commitment to build 14,000 prison places by 2031. I hope this will ensure emergency measures as in SDS40 which saw prisoners released automatically having served 14% of their service last year do not have to be used again. It is in the context of the prisons capacity crisis that the government commissioned the Sentencing Review conducted by David or which reported last month and he gave evidence to the committee last week.

Many of the reviews and recommendations have accepted the improvement of the government. This includes recommendations for the model of sentencing called the earned progression model. Which can see some prisoners who are serving fixed term sentences released after serving one third of their sentence. Dependent on their behaviour. This recommendation and others within the review are aimed at making great use of non-custodial sentences and therefore attempting to reduce the prison population. I look forward to seeing the detail of how the commendations will be implemented.

In the forthcoming Sentencing Bill. Non-custodial sentences will place an additional burden on the already struck -- struggling Probation Service, to which I will now turn. Just before I do that could I issue a cautionary note. Even if David talks recommendations are wholly successful, the prisons will still be full. And this has unintended consequences. It means for example prisoners have to be slotted into places where they become available. Rehabilitation is more difficult. Sky News reported recently they are put into lower category prizes, sea and the category prisons years before they should have been in terms of their sentence.

And the prison escorts service which is already a part of the state is often bringing prisoners late to Court because they are not available in their local prisons. Anything that can be done for effective community punishment -- effective community punishment and rehabilitation is clearly good. Of course I will. Four

**** Possible New Speaker ****

With 80% of offenders being reoffenders doesn't that show our reoffenders doesn't that show our current system is really very broken and we need a different approach and and we need a different approach and would my honourable friend degree would my honourable friend degree the opportunities we have -- agree the opportunities we have with the Sentencing Review can keep our communities safer by properly addressing reoffending?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

addressing reoffending? She is absolute right. We are

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She is absolute right. We are relying on the Court review and the implemented of the recommendations to do two things. Firstly to make sure there is capacity in the sure there is capacity in the prisons for the growing number of people who are being sentenced in people who are being sentenced in our courts but also the longer term, to reduce down prison numbers by to reduce down prison numbers by effective rehabilitation. That can take place in prisons but not in overcrowded prisons on the whole.

It can take place more effectively in can take place more effectively in the community by way of getting people back into normal daily life. people back into normal daily life. Prison certainly is not. On that Prison certainly is not. On that vein let me continue by talking about the Probation Service. I say it will see an additional £700 million per year to support the million per year to support the review and the reforms in the Sentencing Review. That is a substantial increase in funding.

It is intended to enable probation to supervise more people in the community and expand electronic tagging. Probation Service currently manages 240,000 individuals on Court order or licence. Worryingly last year in annual report showed the HMS probation labelled 10 local services as requiring improvement and 40 as inadequate. Identifying staffing and unmanageable workloads, deficit of workplace and insufficient management risk the public protection and safeguarding. It also found outstanding statutory victim work, commitment and vision from staff as some good partnership working and our committee has seen this themselves on their visits to the probation services.

I would however like to raise my particular concern around the ability of the current electronic tagging provider Serco. To deal with the dramatic increase in demand on their services. That will inevitably result from the Sentencing Bill. The committee has been infrequent -- has been in frequent correspondence with the prisons Minister to raise our concerns regarding the poor performance of Serco. This has also been highlighted by Channel 4 and their dispatches program. The committee have identified several issues with management of the tagging contract including substantial delays to the fitting of tags even to serious offenders.

We were shocked to learn financial penalties have a levy on Serco every month since they took over the service in May 2024. It is unclear to me how Serco will be able to deal with increased demand given their unacceptable performance when managing the electronic tagging service at its current level. I would like to briefly say something about the conditions of the prison estate. In 2023 HM Chief Inspector it of prisons Charlie Taylor said one in 10 prisons should be closed down.

He stated at around 14 victim Tory and Giles -- Victorian jails were so poorly designed, overcrowded and ill-equipped they could not provide proper accommodation. Last year 63% of prisoners reported overcrowding. Which is often with two or more prisoners in a cell which is designed for one person. With no private toilet facilities. Drugs are an increasing problem in prison and the committee has covered this extensively tackling drugs in prison inquiry which is due to prison inquiry which is due to Between April 2023 and 2024 there were almost...

Aged 18 and over in prison settings. In the 12 months to December 2024 there were 10,600 assaults on prison staff, violence is also on the increase in prisons, partly the result of the By the abundance of drugs available. Equivalent to 122 assaults per 1,000 prisoners, an increase of 13 percent from the previous years, the highest number of assaults on prison staff recorded in one year. The use of force by prison officers and rates of self-harm on prisoners have been increasing in recent years, self- harm is 10 percent higher in 2024 than in 2023.

Overcrowding, increased drug use, violence and self-harm contribute towards the distressing environment for prisoners. Rehabilitating can be almost impossible in some institutions. We are undertaking a major inquiry into rehabilitation and resettlement which I hope will shed more light on these troubling pictures. We have the continuing scandal of IPP prisoners. There has to be, I recommend to the Minister the report published this week by the Howard league on a new approach to IPP prisoners which would serve to reduce the numbers continuing into custody.

Let me turn to the court service and HMCTS, the second largest body in the MoJ. Spending on HMCTS accounted for 21 percent of planned spending and capital spending. The backlog stands at around 74,000, result of a number of factors, one of which is the shortage of criminal lawyers, driven by low legal aid pay rates and poor working conditions. Backlog in the cause is detrimental to thousands of people, victims, witnesses and defenders. Wait in limbo for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

justice. I'm grateful to the honourable and learned gentlemen giving way. He and learned gentlemen giving way. He raises an important point around court battles, another important factor is having magistrates, legal factor is having magistrates, legal advisers, et cetera to hear these cases. The magistrates Association raised concerns that the review is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

raised concerns that the review is insufficient to tackle that. Does he share their concerns? I do share those concerns. I do

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do share those concerns. I do not have time, I will take a few more minutes with my speech, to go more minutes with my speech, to go into what is happening in their magistrates' courts, it is a debate for another day. But shortage of magistrates, shortage of legal clerks, and low pay rates across HMCTS is one of the factors which is HMCTS is one of the factors which is meaning we cannot get to grips with this backlog, even though I have no doubt the government wishes to do doubt the government wishes to do that.

I welcome the Lord that. I welcome the Lord Chancellor's allocation of 110,000 sitting days in the Crown Court in 2025 /26, the highest sitting day 2025 /26, the highest sitting day 2025 /26, the highest sitting day made since HMCTS was created. I hope made since HMCTS was created. I hope this makes some reduction in the backlog, however I note that the allegation is below the 113,000 days that they told the committee there Crown Court would sit for in the last financial year.

There have been similar increases in sitting dates or other cause, including magistrates' courts. The and acknowledge the allocation of days is not enough on its own to severely reduce the backlog in the Crown courts and more radical reform is required. I welcome the independent review of course which will propose options for short-term and long-term reform, aimed at ensuring cases are dealt with proportionately in line with current pressures on the Crown Court. And exploring how the courts operate as efficiently as possible.

I look forward to the first report of the review due to be published next month. I would like to conclude by briefly touching on the role of the Legal Aid Agency. In terms of expenditure, the LMAA is the third largest body in the MoJ, the budget of around 0.9 billion, made eight percent of the MoJ's total resource percent of the MoJ's total resource budget. But between -- 2009 and 2010, the spending decreased. I am surprised that was not a review of the Legal Aid Agency, the only context was the efficiency savings in the MoJ in the period.

There have been concerns about the sustainability of the legal aid sector, the number of legal aid firms, and the number of barristers practising in this area. In March 2025, the Law Society said the number of criminal duty solicitors had fallen by 26 percent since 2017. This may in the future leave many individuals unable to access their right to free advice. I welcome the MoJ announcement in December 2024 for the additional 90 million per year for criminal aid solicitors, I look forward to seeing the results of their consultation on this.

It may well not be enough and the 15 percent uplift in barristers fees as percent uplift in barristers fees as a consequence of the review took so long to come in and so far overtaken by the increase in costs that that needs to be looked at again in the future if we are to sustain the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

criminal bar. I am grateful to the honourable member for giving way. On the subject of lack of legal aid solicitors and barristers, does my honourable friend agree with me that honourable friend agree with me that that is only going to compound the problems of the court backlog, problems of the court backlog, giving cases will either have to be adjourned as a consequence of lack of legal counsel or where defendants of legal counsel or where defendants are appearing without legal counsel, those cases tend to take longer those cases tend to take longer because the very nature of it is that those defendants will need more time from other court services and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

time from other court services and is my honourable friend concerned about that? This is already happening. Nonavailability of counsel, CPS or Nonavailability of counsel, CPS or Defence Council is already one of Defence Council is already one of the main reasons for ineffective trial. I'm hoping the Minister will have something about that, and the have something about that, and the government's plans to alleviate it. I briefly mentioned the cyber attack I briefly mentioned the cyber attack that the Legal Aid Agency was subject to in April, it revealed concerns regarding the robustness of government manage digital services government manage digital services and the protection of data.

It holds risks of the day-to-day operation of the justice system and I think we need, not day -- today perhaps, but soon, the further statement the courts Minister promised in relation to the further steps taken to recover that position. The committee will be conducting its own inquiry into access to justice, beginning with a court of evidence this summer. I would like to conclude by re-emphasising the importance of the Criminal Justice System plays in their proper functioning in our society. Our society should not be out of mind in this respect.

I appreciate the steps this government is taking and the struggle of the task has going forward, but there is so much to do that we need to get on with this in a speedy fashion. Finally, let me say thank you to all of those who were in the Criminal Justice System, those who risk their lives and safety on the frontline, prison officers and probation officers, those who keep the system running, judges, barristers, court staff, across the PCC people going above and beyond because of the situation it has been left in.

I would like to say that I am sure this is from both sides of the House, we all appreciate the work that goes on everyday to keep people that goes on everyday to keep people
13:56
Ashley Fox Portrait Sir Ashley Fox MP (Bridgwater, Conservative)
-
-
The Chancellor substantially increase the budget of the Ministry of Justice in the spending review

**** Possible New Speaker ****

from £11.9 billion in 2023/24, two The Chancellor substantially increase the budget of the Ministry increase the budget of the Ministry from £11.9 billion in 2023/24, £215.6 billion in 2028/29. We are told it is a real terms increase, told it is a real terms increase, 3.1 percent over five years. It is our duty in this place not just to applaud ever larger sums of money being spent, but also to scrutinise that that money is spent well and it represents good value for money for the taxpayer.

There is no question that the Criminal Justice System is under strain. I trust the Lord Chancellor will do her best to ensure that she uses their money wisely to fix the various problems wisely to fix the various problems the chairman of the Select Committee has described. One of the biggest problems facing the Criminal Justice System is the Crown Court backlog. As of the end of 2024, there were almost 75,000 cases awaiting trial. This is an increase on the figure when the Lord Chancellor took office.

And the figure is projected to rise further. Justice delayed is to rise further. Justice delayed is justice denied. Witnesses memories justice denied. Witnesses memories fade and victims feel they have been forgotten. I appreciate that much of forgotten. I appreciate that much of this rise was caused by the pandemic and we are still dealing with the fallout. But the Lord Chancellor must do more to reduce that backlog. While there is more money for the cause as part of the spending review, we need to ensure it is effectively deployed.

The government says it is a priority, yet we still have empty court rooms. When the honourable lady Chief Justice came to Parliament last November, she offered 6,500 additional sitting dates. Can the Minister explain why the Lord Chancellor did not accept every single one of those extra days that was offered? The Lord Chancellor must use the additional money she has been given to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of crown and magistrates' courts and reduce the backlogs? The justice system also faces a lack of prison spaces.

The Gauke review, commissioned by the Lord Chancellor, has effectively recommended the ending of short prison sentences in favour of community sentences. About half of admissions to prison of all sentences of less than 12 months. Howard Lee says about 30,000 people a year are sentenced to six months or less. Setting aside for one moment as to whether this is the right policy, which I doubt, if it is implemented by the government, it will require a very large increase in the number of probation officers.

Happy to give way.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving way. While he talks about probation and prison places, does he share my concern that it is all very share my concern that it is all very well for the government to announce £7 billion to deliver prison places by 2031, which is six years away, by 2031, which is six years away, while 16,000 prisoners are walking the streets because they were the streets because they were released early by this government. What will happen in the next six years? More prisoners released early

**** Possible New Speaker ****

years? More prisoners released early where we wait for these prison places? I thinking for his intervention. The danger is the public lose The danger is the public lose confidence in the Criminal Justice System if prisoners are released so early. There is already a shortfall early. There is already a shortfall of nearly 2,000 probation officers. of nearly 2,000 probation officers. There are now 200 fewer probation officers than when Labour took officers than when Labour took office. If the government intends to go ahead with this plan, we need to know how they plan to recruit the know how they plan to recruit the additional probation officers that they will need? What is their plan? If they go ahead with abolishing short sentences, those community sentences are going to have to be seen to be really tough and seen to be really tough and worthwhile by the public if the Criminal Justice System is to retain confidence.

I fear the government does not have a plan for that. While we see there is more money in the budget allocated for Prison and Probation Service is, we do not get any detail about what this means in terms of recruiting those extra probation officers. I would be grateful if the Minister could address that. I would also like the government to look at other methods of alleviating the strain on prison places that do not involve additional expenditure. For example deporting foreign national offenders.

There are currently 11,000 foreign offenders in our prisons. But our record on deporting them remains poor. Only 3,500 of them were deported last year. Too many are still able to avoid deportation by using the ECHR. This deportation by using the ECHR. This The government has said they will review the right family life and in serious cases related to asylum seekers who have been convicted of sexual offences. I welcome that. But we need to go much further. In my view we should report all foreign national offenders --....

To make sure we have enough prison spaces is actually to build more prisons. And during the General Election campaign the party opposite promised to build 20,000 additional places. But since the years they took office, little progress has been made. And it has been revealed recently they have actually cut hundreds of millions of pounds from the capital budget to cover the cost of pay increases for staff and the imposition of the Chancellor's jobs tax. It is tempting to welcome an increase in a department's budget.

But we need to make sure the spending is matched by proper accountability and proper planning. We cannot afford for this new funding to be simply absorbed by the justice bureaucracy. Will the Minister explain how much the extra money is -- his department has been allocated will go in to additional national insurance charges, rises and inflation? It is simply not credible to make countless premises in opposition or on the campaign trail only to quietly shelve those when in office.

-- Promises in opposition. People hold the government to account for the commitments they have given.
14:03
Kim Johnson Portrait Kim Johnson MP (Liverpool Riverside, Labour)
-
-
Khmelnytskyi. I would like to thank my good friend the chair of the Justice Committee, the member for Hammersmith and Chiswick for his excellent speech. And for securing this debate today. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in today's debate today. And I declare my interest as chair of the APPG for miscarriage of justice. I welcome the Estimate and the commitment from the spending review but I want to focus my remarks on an area of great concern.

The Ministry of Justice spending on criminal justice. More specifically to adequately prevent and correct miscarriages of justice. What is the value of justice if innocent people are still being convicted, imprisoned and left to rot in our Criminal Justice System? The sad truth is that for all the billions we are debating today, the ministry is failing in one of its most fundamental duties, to ensure innocent people are protected from wrongful conviction and supporting -- supported when the system fails them.

Miscarriages of justice are not theoretical, they are real. And ongoing. And they destroy lives. Andrew Malkinson wrongfully imprisoned for 17 years for a crime he did not commit. Exonerated last year but only after torturous journeys through a system that was more interested in detecting itself and in covering the truth. -- Uncovering the truth. Peter Swallow a wrongfully convicted of murder wrongfully spent 18 years in prison before being exonerated only last month. He is a victim of the longest miscarriage of justice involving a living prisoner in British legal history.

These cases expose deep systemic flaws and happened in plain sight. But across the country, we have individuals experiencing criminalisation and injustice without proper recourse. Their names are not always making the headlines but their stories are no less important. Miscarriages of justice are not rare in accident, they are now sadly and inevitable consequence of a failing system, stripped of its checks and balances. At the heart of that system is the criminal cases review commission. A body that was designed to be the safety net.

To identify where the system had gone wrong and to help innocent people wrong and to help innocent people find justice. Yet the sea like at the CCRC is in crisis. In May the Justice Select Committee published a damning indictment of the leadership and performance. It stated the CCRC had stated and I quote, every -- a remarkable inability to learn from its own mistakes. And it had deteriorated significantly in its ability to fulfil its vital function. The committee concluded Root and Branch Review is required and under the clearest possible terms it found it was untenable for the current Chief Executive Karen Kneller to remain in post.

This is not political rhetoric. This is a cross-party commitment of this House carrying out its scrutiny function and reaching deeply troubling conclusions. The CCRC failure to come at a terrible cost. Not to those wrongly convicted but also to public confidence in the rule of law. Every year it fails to identified miscarriages, innocent people remain behind bars for lives -- with their lives put on hold always permanently destroyed. But Madam Deputy Speaker, I also want to acknowledge a step in the right direction.

I welcome the appointment of Dame Vera Baird Casey as the interim chair of the CCRC. Dame Vera Baird is a long and respect record of championing justice and accountability. I hope her leadership marks a turning point and I look forward to seeing real progress made. Not just in leadership but in culture, performance and independence. For that to happen the government must make, must take responsibility series. Reform cannot come on the cheap. The CCRC must be properly resourced. And empowered to do the job it was created to do.

Because until we properly fund our safeguards, miscarriages of justice will continue. The human costs will remain unbearable and the financial cost will the unsustainable. I also quickly want to touch on two areas that are critical to justice. Legal aid and forensic sciences. Since 2010 funding has been slashed by hundreds of millions and access to justice and representation is now a postcode lottery. In the collapse of criminal defence provision across England and Wales we see this. There is no entire areas with no local legal aid solicitors.

This proportionately affecting those from marginalised groups, those most vulnerable to miscarriages of justice. Forensic science, once the gold standard has been fragmented and degraded. A three-year inquiry set up by the APPG on miscarriage of justice. Into forensics. This has recently concluded the sector is in a graveyard spiral. Leading to poorer police investigations, increasing unsolved crimes and more wrongful convictions. Evidence shows of the system is continuing to fail not only to ensure the prevention of miscarriage of justice but their speedy identification and resolution when they do occur.

We support calls for a full national order forensic provision to assess the urgent support needed to prevent further decline and to protect future investigations and trials from preventable failure. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like now to talk about prisons and the chronic underfunding that is failing both staff and those in custody. At the justice union's Parliamentary group yesterday I heard first-hand about the crisis in prison education. According to Ofsted 82% of prisons and young offender institutions are rated inadequate or require improvement for education skills and work provision.

Prison educators are paid less than their counterparts in the wider FE sector. The Education Select Committee warned in 2022 that poor pay, unsafe working environments and lack of respect have driven every -- have driven a roof like a recruitment and retention crisis. This is unacceptable. Education is one of the most powerful tools for rehabilitation. Yet we are underfunding and undervaluing the very people delivering it. The same is true of prison maintenance. Privatisation has been a costly failure. Basic repairs go unmet, squalor is widespread and maintenance backlog is now estimated at nearly £2 billion.

I support the POA is bringing back campaign for in sourcing Britain -- prison maintenance. The solving of this problem for generation must adhere. Crumbling prisons where contractor failed, left dangerous and decaying conditions for both staff and visitors, I also want to express my support to the POA's campaign on retirement age, asking officers to work until they are 68 is such a high stress, high-risk environment it is simply an -- unsustainable. 68 is simply too late. To conclude we are debating how to spend 18 billion in the Ministry of Justice.

But money alone is not the issue. It is about priority. If the very foundations of justice are crumbling then every other investment is undermined. The Criminal Justice System continues to fail innocent people. Chronic underfunding has rendered safeguards weak and ineffective. Leadership has been absent where it was most needed and time and again the system refused to admit where it gets things wrong. Miscarriages of justice are not tragic accidents, they are the inevitable consequence of a system that is under resourced, poorly led and structurally resistant to scrutiny.

Every wrongful conviction is not just a personal tragedy, it is a betrayal of our legal system. And the value it claims to uphold. Because justice denied to one is justice denied to all. Let us not, let us invest not just in building but in truth, not just in processes but in people. And above all let us put real justice, not convenience, not cost-cutting at the heart of everything the Ministry of Justice does. Thank you. does. Thank you.
14:12
Pam Cox Portrait Pam Cox MP (Colchester, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. I rise today as the member of Parliament for Colchester, as a member of the Justice Select Committee and as the recently elected chair of the APPG were -- APPG of Affairs and I declare my interest in relation to that APPG. This for the Ministry of Justice proposes a 6.5 increase in day-to- day spending and a 20.8% increase in capital investment. It is a very welcome set of figures. Necessary of course because this government inherited a crisis from the last.

A crisis across the Criminal Justice System in our courts, in our prisons and in our probation services. Let us begin with the calls like the courts and as my honourable friend the justice of the Select Committee has outlined, the Court backlog stands at 74,000 cases. That is double the level in 2019. Victims are waiting years for justice. The increase in sitting days investments in digital infrastructure are unnecessary.. -- A necessary first step. I visited our courts were dedicated public servants were working very hard despite these challenges to deliver justice for victims.

We need bold reform. I welcome and look forward to the recommendations from the Brian Levinson's review. Which we hope will indeed be bold. The justice system often more than not seems to be stuck in a bygone age. Turning to around prisons we all see the failures of the last government laid bare. Failure to plan for the long- term in prison places, a failure to rehabilitate prisoners and failure to prevent reoffending. Prison population now exceeds 87th -- 87,000 people with projections suggested it could reach over 100,000 by 2028.

That means overcrowding is rife, 24% of prisoners are held in crowded conditions. The maintenance backlog is now ballooned to 1.8 billion. You cannot have effective rehabilitation in a prison system that is so overcrowded. Time and again we have heard from the Select Committee of pure contract and management and of failure around transparency and value for money. Across a whole range of contracts from education to maintenance, to drug and alcohol services. I hope the new Procurement Act will vitally tighten up those essential processes.

The bitumen tactics to be fit for purpose. If it is not then the prisons will not be fit for purpose. The government 10 year Prison Capacity Strategy promises 14,000 new places. That is compared to just 500 constructed under the last government over those 14 wasted years. We cannot build our way however out of this crisis alone. My honourable friend has said this. We also need a smarter approach to sentencing and rehabilitation so I welcome also then the justice Secretary commitment to the progression model and the expansion of community-based alternatives.

Progression must be matched with access to decent prison programs, health education and well-being and so on. So progression is indeed owned and helps offender sterility in their lives around. And thereby protects the public and victims from harm. Those reforms must be matched by investment in probation. Privation service is under severe strains as we have heard. Any local services and staff turnover is still too high. There is a £700 million fund for probation. That is a very good start.

We must make sure it delivers measurable improvement in those reoffending ways. I would like to see a brief legal aid. Expenditure on legal wages down but legal aid is down 31% in real terms since 2010 and that is hollowing out access to justice. Recent commitments on increasing funding for solicitors and youth Court work are welcome but I would echo comments made by the side of the House we need to go further on legal aid where possible. The justice system that only works for those who can afford it is no justice system at all.

To conclude, this estimate reflects a government that recognises the scale of the challenge. The Secretary of State and her ministerial team have worked extreme to deliver this increase in funding. The last government's control of the courts, the prisons and probation. These measures will go some way to putting that right so we can all once again have faith in we can all once again have faith in
14:17
Linsey Farnsworth Portrait Linsey Farnsworth MP (Amber Valley, Labour)
-
-
I rise as a member of the Justice Select Committee and former prosecutor who worked within the Criminal Justice System. Today is an opportunity not only to examine Ministry of Justice's estimates for the coming year, but to assess whether our Criminal Justice System is being resourced to meet the scale of the challenges it faces and make our communities safer. I want to talk particularly about the sentencing review and the impact of that on resourcing, particularly for the Probation Service.

We know we inherited a system that was on the brink of collapse, the 2024 report on prison population growth revealed that England and had the highest per capita prison population in Western Europe. This was a crisis that our government had to respond to immediately upon entering office. The Justice Secretary's temporary early release scheme was difficult but necessary decision to protect the justice system from making all together and ensure dangerous offenders were not turned away at the door due to lack of space.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

She referred to the early release scheme is temporary. Issue 100 percent confident that it is temporary scheme and the government

**** Possible New Speaker ****

temporary scheme and the government will not be releasing more prisoners over the next four years? What I would say in that regard

**** Possible New Speaker ****

What I would say in that regard is we inherited a particularly drastic situation which is not going to be turned around overnight. We to be turned around overnight. We to be turned around overnight. We will take the important measures I am sure the Minister will speak on am sure the Minister will speak on behalf of the government, but I expect the government will take the difficult decisions on an ongoing basis until we are in a better basis until we are in a better position and that may have to be something that is reviewed in due course.

I do not speak for the government in that regard but I do government in that regard but I do trust them to make sure our members of the public are safe and there are places available by whatever means they need to make sure dangerous they need to make sure dangerous criminals can be put in jail. We criminals can be put in jail. We must now move beyond this crisis must now move beyond this crisis into crisis management. The mission driven Labour government is driven Labour government is investing to deliver 14,000 new prison places by 2031 and my honourable friend, the member for Colchester, was right in pointing out that that contrast quite starkly with the 500 prison places that were created across a 14 year period under the last government.

However it is clear that the solution to overcrowding cannot be simply to build more prisons, instead lies in the breaking of the cycle of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reoffending. I know as members of the Select Committee you will want to be accurate in what you are saying.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

accurate in what you are saying. There is no 'you,' Unless you are talking to the chair.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

talking to the chair. Does she accept we added 13,000

**** Possible New Speaker ****

prison places during our time in office? I recognise prison places were

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I recognise prison places were created but we are talking in net terms. In terms there were 500 extra.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

extra. Certainly not happy with only 500 net over 14 years. That is why this net over 14 years. That is why this government is taking action to increase prison places in real increase prison places in real increase prison places in real terms. We need to sort out the cycle of reoffending which places a of reoffending which places a massive strain on the system. Almost 60 percent of those receiving a 60 percent of those receiving a prison sentence of 12 months or less reoffended within a year.

In these instances, focusing on what happens after a crime has been committed is after a crime has been committed is the best way to prevent future offending. We do not need a justice system that is bigger, but one that is fairer and more effective. Our ambition and reforms to make our streets safer cannot be met by enforcement alone. They must be backed by sustained funding, particularly to support the Probation Service which lies at the heart of a functioning and fair justice system.

This takes me back to a project I was involved in in the early 2000's, I was proud to be involved in that in Nottingham, the community Justice initiative under the last Labour government's respect agenda. I am that old to remember that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For the record, I did not comment on their lady because my age. Indeed. I am grateful you did

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Indeed. I am grateful you did not. I'm very conscious of my own not. I'm very conscious of my own self. The community Justice initiative brought the community into the justice process, into the justice process, facilitated Community Impact Statements for certain offences such as antisocial behaviour and took a holistic approach to sentencing holistic approach to sentencing which aims to tackle drivers of offending, including drug misuse, unemployment and poor education. unemployment and poor education. Despite the initiative working, it was unfortunately short lived because ultimately it lacked the because ultimately it lacked the resources and funding in the longer term for it to be sustainable.

Just like the community Justice initiative, the reforms that have set out in the first year of this set out in the first year of this government offers enormous promise. government offers enormous promise. I do not have a glass ball and I certainly do not claim to be able to see in the future but as we look ahead to the ministries prescribed ahead to the ministries prescribed spending for the following year, it seems there are two possible seems there are two possible scenarios before us, in the first we learn from the past, in the second, we repeat its mistakes.

I asked the Minister, if I can be clear today, we cannot allow history to repeat itself. This cannot happen. We must not allow ourselves to return to a crisis point because we are unable to resource the very initiatives which will help us reform the justice system. As a prosecutor I saw the same individuals pass through the courts again and again and how this cycle of reoffending devastated lives, clogged up the courts and cost the taxpayer millions. I therefore wholeheartedly welcome the shift from short prison sentences, proven to do little to reduce reoffending, towards community services which get to the root of reoffending behaviour.

I am pleased we have researched-based sentencing review which can work to reduce this problem and tackle crime at its cause. But it must be financed in a sustained and long- term manner if it is to succeed. The Probation Service stands at a crossroads and its future will be decided by the advocacy of resourcing, staffing and funding. The government promised it will receive an increase of up to £700 million per year to support the reform set out in the independent sentencing review by 2028/29.

The Minister for prisons, parole and probation set a target for 1,300 probation staff to be recruited in the next year. The Minister of Justice's budget for 2025/26 shows welcoming increases including nearly £800 million more in the day-to-day spending, 523 million of which The prison probation, and there is a 32 percent increase in capital expenditure. But the justice system has suffered from years of underfunding and under resourcing, which has resulted in overcrowding and overburdening. Justice reform is about protecting communities, supporting victims and giving offenders the opportunity to transform their lives and reintegrate into society.

If we are to avoid a return to the crisis we inherited, the Probation Service must receive the resources it desperately needs. Thank you. desperately needs. Thank you.
14:26
Tom Hayes Portrait Tom Hayes MP (Bournemouth East, Labour)
-
-
Back Bench contribution. that has grown over recent years, every display of incompetence, every display of national decline and the Conservatives have hollowed out trust in our democracy to get things done. The public has had its fill, and no other areas have they seen such decline and injustice as with the Criminal Justice System and the Conservatives. The Conservatives melted our Criminal Justice System, lost control of security services, it is the Conservatives policies. In crashing the Criminal Justice System, the Conservatives did more harm to our country's faith in democracy and ability of the state to get things done than we can ever know or quantify.

I do not exaggerate that because when I knock on doors and people ring up numbers, they cannot get the police to attend. When they submit crime reports and do not hear back, when they feel there is an absence of policing on the streets, this is something -- and inheritance they have given the Labour government, there is a hopelessness in our politics. Courts are clogged, victims waiting years for justice, police officers stretched to the limits, legal aid hollowed out and communities feel unsafe and unheard.

Shoplifting, antisocial behaviour and the illegal use of e-scooters and e-bikes are examples of things our immunities raise as examples of local decline, to which the too few police to respond. Not just a matter of law and order, matter of fairness, decency and safety. -- Our communities. The Labour government has a challenge to put right the Criminal Justice System so fundamentally broken. I see the opposition laughing at what I'm saying is really disheartening. I would happily give way for you to apologise for the 14 years of chaos.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

You consider the ratio of Labour members to Conservative members and how many people are here today and how many people on that side we can how many people on that side we can be proud of our showing competitor that on your side.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that on your side. That is so wide of the mark, it is so unsurprising the Conservatives is so unsurprising the Conservatives are floundering in polls and so unwelcome in our communities. We can and must regain public trust in our and must regain public trust in our Criminal Justice System. We must regain trust in our ability of our democracy to do things. We want to Criminal Justice System that works for everyone, that protects the public, respects victims, rehabilitates in a way that is possible and were not possible lock people up for the appropriate amount of time.

Protects the Probation Service and Val prison officers and Service and Val prison officers and make sure we can be a secure country again. I'll welcome the announcement again. I'll welcome the announcement of 13,000 more police officers, 40 going into my local area, we are creating court backlogs with more creating court backlogs with more sitting days, something welcomed. To sitting days, something welcomed. To champion rights, someone who ran a champion rights, someone who ran a domestic abuse service for 14 years before my election, that is something that is important to me.

I know many colleagues care passionately about tackling domestic violence. And also rebuilding youth services. I know the importance of the third sector. I will make a plea to the Minister that in thinking through how we can rehabilitate those who can be rehabilitated, the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

third sector has a role to play. With caseworkers... I thank him for giving way and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank him for giving way and that very important point. Would he join me in a knowledge in the excellent work of organisations such excellent work of organisations such as futures unlocked in rugby, who I as futures unlocked in rugby, who I met recently. I met the trustees and volunteers, these small charities do volunteers, these small charities do so much work to help ex-prisoners as they transition towards life outside they transition towards life outside they transition towards life outside of prison.

I was hugely impressed and they are often doing work that the Probation Service cannot do,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

despite its best efforts after the 14 years of underfunding under the last government. I thank you for that important

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank you for that important point and welcome the work of the charity and charities in his area, as I welcome the work of charities as I welcome the work of charities in all of our areas. He puts his finger on our issue. Charities can do things that the probation service do things that the probation service cannot, they create trust in people, further trust to statutory services, further trust to statutory services, provide bespoke support that trees individuals as human beings who are individuals as human beings who are seeking education, employment support, mental health and addiction support, housing assistance, some cases the most powerful support, peer support.

Charities providing the bespoke support cannot just help reduce reoffending rates, help rehabilitate, help people get into work, but can bring down crime rates and the cost to the public purse of the Criminal Justice System. We need to recognise the link between poverty and exclusion and offending rates. Not to say people who grew up in disadvantaged commit crime, but we need to recognise the evidence, which is there is correlation and causation and we need to be tackling the root causes of poverty and exclusion and in so tackle the exclusion and in so tackle the Enclosing I want to thank the minute of what he is about to say which I'm sure will be excellent and I want to thank honourable members for their contributions.

If our democracy feels fragile it is because of the record of the last government in this area. That democracy is to recover it will be because of the prompt and proportionate action I believe this government will take. And the action it has taken to truly address the challenges we face. The British people know what they want. The Telus often enough. It is our job to listen. It is our job to come to terms and find progress and the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

outcomes they are crying out for. I now come to the Front Benchers. Thank you. I thank the chair of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I thank the chair of the Justice Select Committee working with my honourable friend, the member for Amber Valley for making
14:32
Josh Babarinde Portrait Josh Babarinde MP (Eastbourne, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
member for Amber Valley for making the pitch. As the Backbench Business Committee to secure this debate. I also join the Select Committee chair in thanking the incredible staff who work across our Criminal Justice System. If I may add as well, charities like the incredible band of brothers in Eastbourne who work with young ex-offenders across my hometown to tackle crime. The last government as has been documented in this chamber today, left our Criminal Justice System in a state.

Our prisons were left in crisis, overcrowded with increases in violence and self-harm incidents at their highest levels since records began. Our probation services were left high and dry with an electronic tagging contract left offenders with violent convictions unmonitored for far too long. Our courts were left dealing with staggeringly high backlogs with tens of thousands of open cases and victims waiting months, even years for justice. And of course as has been mentioned by honourable members, reoffending is through the roof with 80% of people in our prisons being reoffenders.

That is a symbol of more crime, of more victims and of more misery and harm. This of course carries an enormous pricetag to with reoffending costing society more than £18 billion per year. The consequences of this dire set of circumstances have been playing for us all to see but I saw it myself when working in this space before being elected to this House. I spent my career supporting X offenders, young ex-offenders out of crimes and out of gangs in Eastbourne in very different ways.

I remember working with the particular young person and I said to him on his first day off work with us to come and where some smart trousers. He did not know what I meant. And he said Josh due in Court rises? -- Do you mean Court trousers? What a sad state of affairs that a person in our country has grown up being more accustomed to the Criminal Justice System than he is our education system. That is the legacy I am afraid of the last government.

Another young person I remember working with and into a young offenders institution that was notorious for its issues with violence. He was working with us as a phone repair technician before he went in and became -- and came back when he came out except he came out missing a finger as a result of some of the things that were going on in that place. And again some of our institutions are out of control. As a victim myself who has been through the Criminal Justice System I have experienced what it is like to wait years to have my case heard.

Through an adversarial system that seeks to be down victims as opposed to support them to rise up. This needs to change. And so I welcome giving credit where it is due to the investment this government is making our Criminal Justice System. Through the spending review. This investment itself is not the silver bullet and it might not go far enough to right the wrongs of the past. It must be accompanied by reform. And so on courts, there is no mention in the spending review specifically of investing in our crumbling courts that cause so much inefficiency and cost of a system, cost victims and cost justice.

As my honourable friend from Solihull Leader of the Opposition, Solihull West and Shirley mentioned earlier in the debate, the magistrates Association has been particularly concerned about the lack of mention of legal advisers and funding for them in magistrates courts which is rolled deaf which is resulting in one intensity was being cancelled. And on prisons while investment has been announcing creating new prison places no reference to extra funding for women's centres or to custody as featured in the spending review.

Despite this being something that David Gauke recommended in his Independent Review. And despite charities like working chance telling us that women's centres are often at least 10 times more effective at reducing reoffending and cost-effective than the prison system. On probation while we welcome the £700 million that has been committed to that service it is critical as per the demands of Women's Aid, that some of that cash goes towards mandatory training for probation officers as far as domestic abuse and recognising domestic abuse and protecting survivors of domestic abuse is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

concerned. I will give way. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving way. I just wanted on that particular point to say, the money that goes into the probation system it is clear it may not be enough to deal with the scale of the added pressures there are going to be on pressures there are going to be on the provision system. The chair has a ready managed, has a ready talked a ready managed, has a ready talked about -- already talked about contract management. And the example of circa was a really good one.

Where there is going to be so much more reliance on electronic tagging. And whether that will now happen.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And whether that will now happen. I agree with the point my honourable friend from Wales is making. This is about much more than just spend. This is about the efficiency of the spend. Taxpayers deserve far better than what they deserve far better than what they are getting at the moment from this Serco contract. Where as I said Serco contract. Where as I said earlier many offenders are being left without the proper robust monitoring victims and survivors and our communities need and deserve.

If I come to reoffending, the David Gauke review offered many recommendations to unlock supply in our prisons was fairly light on what can be done to stem the demand going into our prisons. And preventing crime and reoffending was the Cinderella of this review. And may be out of scope in some respects. It is critical our Criminal Justice System is reformed in a holistic way. That is the true means of being able to make our Criminal Justice System more efficient.

When it comes to victims and survivors, something that was missing from the spending review work commitments around reversing the damage of the impact of the national insurance increases for employers. Victims charities have written to me saying the increase in those taxes as well as cuts to Police and Crime Commissioner core budgets is tantamount to a seven% real terms cut. In their budget. That means victim services are going to be compromised, victim services not are similar to the services I want to -- I once accessed at SurvivorsUK.

I would urge the government to look again at that. The status quo of more reoffending and exponentially high cost to the taxpayer is both immoral and unsustainable. And while these funds, this investment will go some way in reducing the backlog is increasing prison and improving our increasing prison and improving our probation services there are still vital challenges left and met. As I have expressed, just this week in fact, yesterday it may have been, directly to the Minister, the Liberal Democrats stand ready to work constructively with the government to scrutinise the measures and to give credit where it is due to help achieve more justice for victims, survivors and other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

communities. Shadow Minister.
14:41
Kieran Mullan Portrait Dr Kieran Mullan MP (Bexhill and Battle, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shadow Minister. Thank you. It is a pleasure to respond on behalf of His Majesty opposition. The Ministry of Justice expenditure as it relates to criminal justice for stock and I think the Select Committee chair for securing and opening the debate. I just wanted to say briefly in Armed Forces week as we are, those of us who have been involved in the Criminal Justice System in various guises over the years will do particularly now in our Prison Service and one quarter of prison officers will have an Armed Forces background and we see in the sector alone, the ongoing contrition people from the Armed Forces committee make to our public services in different ways and it is a pleasure to be able to pay tribute to that on the record today during the Armed Forces week.

Moving on this is a very important topic for discussion under our courts, prisons and provision services are the very bedrock of our Granada system. This government has been in charge of key areas of key expenditure in activity for most in a year now. We are the challenges being faced by those in contact with the Criminal Justice System that remain. We almost -- we know from day one this covenant has lurched from crisis to crisis and sadly the Ministry of Justice has not been spared.

As we sped deaf to consider the estimates and the link plans to overcome challenges Lord Astor system it is of course true to say they can only have a meaningful debate if we consider the journey we have been on to respond. I want to focus on the inheritance this government have had. This inheritance can only be fairly considered when we know what we inherited. What we inherited and then despite the challenges, what we delivered and challenges that remain full Labour talk about challenging women heritages in the current system but what did we face arriving in office? We have heard a lot in recent months about Labour being.

Only release schemes for prisoners as a sign of pressures on the system. What exactly was happening with early release at the end of their time of government? Under the last Labour government an astonishing 80,000 prisoners were released early. A huge number stopped just before the election for purely political reasons, leaving us to pick up the pieces in our prison estate we inherited. During our 14 years in office were released just six% of that figure. The numbers they say they have been forced to release since they came into office are a barometer of failure what exactly do members opposite make of the scale of releasing 80,000 prisoners after more than a decade in charge? Perhaps a good excuse for releasing that many prisoners early, perhaps this happened because they have been spending time rightly toughening up sentencing for the worst offenders during their time in office? I am afraid not.

In fact what I consider to be an enormous historical mistake, the consequences of which we are still battling today in terms of the justice system delivering proper punishment, Labour introduced automatic half day released for -- halfway released for essentially all offenders when they were last in. That included 80,000 released early as an emergency scheme that I been talking about earlier, this is just essentially everyone, all offenders being released early. Yet they still manage to have a sustained crisis in prison capacity.

I do not take any lectures opposite from members of the Criminal Justice Act. Under the previous Conservative government were restored public confidence and work to restore public confidence prisoners facing punishment for the crimes and worked hard to ensure unlike Labour, we would not have to release 80,000 prisoners early on emergency release schemes. We brought in serious reforms and were reduced automatic release from halfway to two thirds of a sentence the most serious offenders and a huge step forward for introducing greater degree of proper punishment to the criminal justice system.

Building on that we introduced whole life tariffs for the premeditated murder of children and increased maximum sentences for the worse child abusers through Tony's law. And the maximum sentences for Elizabeth emergency services to Harper's law and those who killed through driving and memories of victims and others. I'm proud of these reforms I make no apologies for them. They do make differences to present going to discuss the changes that are necessary and it is covert more than any other factor that created the challenges we see now.

We did have to tackle the enormous challenges presented by COVID which have left long legacy in criminal justice system. We prioritise the right to jury trials in the way the rest of the world struggle to. We had one of the shorter suspensions of setting the trials and we do what we could to keep trials continuing. We increase today's along the course to set a maximum capacity the three years -- the three days investing 220 million on modernisation with records up to 2025 and extending the use of 2090 courted -- 20 Court rooms.

Despite what Labour now claim Academy justice system moving. We undoubtedly do still face challenges around the backlog. Again I am happy to compare records. Labour MPs are now deeply concerned with backlog. How concerned about Crown Court backlogs were Labour MPs when they were last in government? I can tell members pre-pandemic backlogs in the Crown Court actually reached higher levels during their time in office than it did under us. The increase in the remand population of approximate lie 7,000 above the historical average is a major factor in the challenges we are facing the What What has What has laboured What has laboured in What has laboured in to What has laboured in to make What has laboured in to make a difference since coming into office? Do they wish to maximise sitting days to get the backlog down? They did not.

They repeatedly dragged their feet for almost 6 months, did not take up the Labour Chief Justice on her offer of further sitting days. With each month passed, more loss court days, more people waiting, more pressure on the system then increases sitting days from the outset. What has been their biggest celebration in terms of prison building? It is a celebration of the opening of a new prison, planned, paid for and largely built under the previous Conservative government. Despite what they say, we created 13,000 prison places in office, including two new prisons.

I'm not aware that any of Labour's projected aware that any of Labour's projected Figures. Which they want to use when looking at our record. The announced plans of 14,000 prison places by 2021, but 6,000 of those -- 6,500 of the places were already in the pipeline. Four of the new prisons were planned or under construction, were planned or under construction, Even more concerning is the funding gap, the government allocated 7 billion, but the Minister of Justice and HMPPS expect the expansion cost to be closer to 10 billion, £3 billion shortfall and serious question over how the promised places would be delivered.

How are they building on the legacy of releasing 16,000 prisoners early in their first six months? In the name of sustainability, they are embedding further levels of early release onto the system and unpicking the positive steps we made in government to turn around their legacy of which of -- weaker punishment. They are doing this on the back of a sentencing review by David Gauke on the premise that increasing prison populations were unsustainable. That review was an insult to the views of families and their victims and many -- and the victims and many have told me so.

Imagine launching what you describe as a landmark review of sentencing and giving almost no consideration whatsoever within page after page of a report to what victims and their families actually want to see from sentencing. Instead of a serious attempt to engage with what victims and their families may want, Mr Gauke deploys the patronising talking points that victims and families do not understand sentencing and if they did they would feel much better about it all. This might be of interest to the chair of the current Select Committee because Mr Gauke cherry picked quotes from our excellent report from previous session on public understanding and expectations of sentencing.

That report engaged with what the public would want and raised to determine that more effectively. It takes a type of intellectual approach to go through a report full of rich detail What suits you and hoping no one would notice. I did notice and representatives of victims and their families like justice for victims noticed as well. This half baked exercise in sentencing has served as a launch point for the sentencing policy. If halfway release was not an appalling enough legacy from the last time, they are reducing to one third of a sentence for most offenders and turning our two thirds release for offenders back to halfway release.

Prisons will now be rewarded for doing what is expected of them, obeying prison rules, engaging in education and working, they are basic behaviours of any law-abiding citizen, should not qualify them for early release and definitely not one third of the sentence. That is not justice. It is little to protect the public and is a dereliction of duty. Our Crown Court backlogs have increased by more than 10 percent, standing in excess of 70,000 cases and the remand population sits at 70,000 people.

Problems Labour promised to fix in opposition are getting worse. How does the Lord Chancellor now plan to tackle this challenge? The £450 million committed to the cause in the spending review is perhaps a useful, if not fully adequate, indication. How will the money be spent? The government have no substantial ideas of their own. 14 years apparently was not long enough for them to think of their own innovations. While we await the findings of another independent review, Labour announced custodial sentences over 12 months will vanish, replaced by community sentences.

The consequences are Jail altogether. I have met with local businesses at their wits end. They tell me about rising shoplifting, staff who are afraid and customers who do not feel safe. Removing custodial sentences sends a message of impunity. Labour chose the easy way out. Tackling a prison population not with long-term reform or capacity investment, but by reducing sentences and downplaying criminal behaviour. It puts the public at risk. It was last week reported that they declined to move forward with building any prison block.

They say they are doing everything possible to avoid releasing any, how does that square with that decision? You might think they would grab opportunities but we haven't seen them stand in the way haven't seen them stand in the way of reforms. Making sure victims are awarded losses, they would not support it. Increasing court fines, Labour did not support it. More time to appeal sentences, Labour did not support it. The mismanagement of the economy leaves us with less money to spend on the Ministry of Justice.

Labour have made things worse over any economic metric, unemployment up, downgraded, is there any wonder why? The OBR are concerned about the damaging effects of the taxes. The MoJ's expenditure pails in comparison to what we will be paying in debt over the course of the Parliament. Given the funding allocated to probation and the increasing reliance on it, given the member from the Select Committee highlighted the number of probation officers have gone down they came into power, how do they plan to ensure the money is delivering effective services? How do they plan to close the £3 billion gap in the prisons budget? Given their own thinking is relying on it, when will the Leadsom Report be published? The British people deserve justice system they can trust, that protects victims, punishes offenders and keeps victims say.

This government's approach fails on every single

**** Possible New Speaker ****

count. Can I start by thanking my honourable friends, the chair of the Select Committee, bought his opening Select Committee, bought his opening remarks in securing this important debate, along with everyone else who has commuted so thoughtfully? And has commuted so thoughtfully? And echo his words in paying tribute to echo his words in paying tribute to everyone who works in the criminal everyone who works in the criminal justice system, they do an amazing
14:54
Nicholas Dakin Portrait Sir Nicholas Dakin MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Scunthorpe, Labour)
-
-
justice system, they do an amazing job in protection. And I highlight that work people who have previously been in the Armed Forces play in our criminal justice system. One of the things we know is that Labour has always been tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime. I give three facts to evidence that. 14 years of Labour government we have 27,830 prison places, in 14 years of Conservative government they added 500 net prison places. So far already under this government we added around 2,500 prison places.

The figures speak for themselves. We want a criminal justice system that works for everyone. That is what the honourable member for Bournemouth East said. I think everyone would agree with that. Last summer our prisons were operating at over 99 percent capacity, just days after taking office. We have no choice but to take emergency measures to avoid running out of space. Had we not acted, the result would have been catastrophic, courts grant to a vault, police halting arrest. We would have faced a total breakdown of law and order.

We were left in this position because the previous government, despite their promises and finalist, delivered only those 500 additional prison places in 14 years. Whilst at the same time sentence length rose exponentially. As a result, the prison population is rising by 3,000 each year. This government takes its duty to protect the public very seriously and that is why we are taking the robust, bold action needed to ring an end to the cycle of crisis. Ensuring the British public are never again put at risk by their failure to have enough prison places.

We are committed to bearing down on the outstanding caseload in the courts that a number of members alluded to and delivering swifter justice for victims. But we acknowledge that the challenge facing the Crown Court is significant. As part of the spending review settlement we agreed with the Treasury we will fund record investment for the court system by 2028/29, keeping sitting days at record highs over this period. 110,000 sitting days in the Crown Court just this year. We recognise that this is not enough given the scale of the challenge we inherited.

Even with the record levels of Crown Court funding and our plans for record numbers of future sitting days, without substantial reform of criminal courts, the backlog will continue to grow. That is why the Lord Chancellor commissioned an independent review of the criminal independent review of the criminal courts led by Ryan Levinson, one of the most distinguished judges, to consider the options for longer term reform, as well as reviewing the efficiency and timeliness of court processes through charge to case completion. I would hope that report would report shortly.

We will fund capacity to speed up the processing of asylum appeals, supporting the government's priority to reduce illegal and irregular migration. Legal aid is a vital part of the justice system, as we heard from colleagues across the House, it underpins our plans to build a justice system that works fairly for all parties. In December we announced that criminal legal aid solicitors will receive up to £92 million more a year to address the ongoing challenges in the criminal justice system and get justice for victims.

Following that, in January, we began consulting over £20 million uplift to civil legal aid fees for lawyers working in immigration, asylum and housing and debt sectors. I pay tribute to the Member for Liverpool Riverside who spoke about the importance of forensics in addressing miscarriages of justice as well as issues around prism maintenance in our prisons. We are failing victims if courts cannot deliver swift justice. Prisons run out of places entirely and crime goes without punishment.

The Member for Colchester spoke about this in her contribution. This will have damaging consequences for the criminal justice system if this happens. That is why we are taking steps to rebuild justice system that works and victims have confidence in. We are looking at imposing tougher exclusion zones that limit movement of offenders instead of limiting the movement of victims and continue the provision of free sentencing remarks to victims of rape and serious sexual offences. The reforms will continue dash may include continuing to expand application of electronic monitoring to perpetrators of violence against women and girls and the use of specialist domestic abuse courts with trained staff to support victims and more coordinated management of perpetrators.

We will continue to fund services supporting victims and witnesses. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson made some elegant contributions which I heard clearly. We are creating a new Domestic Abuse Act, so that domestic abuse are known and their victims better protected. We have opened 2,400 prison places. Between 2025 and 2030, the government is providing £7 billion more to build more prison places by 2031, the largest expansion since the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Victorian era. I give way. I did ask in my contribution whether the Minister could outline whether the Minister could outline how much of the extra money his department has been allocated will department has been allocated will go to wage rises, national insurance

**** Possible New Speaker ****

go to wage rises, national insurance and...? The figures I have given here are the figures we are going to deliver. You can be confident about that. While the investment is necessary, it is not sufficient. To address the challenges and ensure prisons create challenges and ensure prisons create better citizens, not better criminals, the Lord Chancellor commissioned the independent commissioned the independent sentencing review shared by David Gauke. As the Lord Chancellor announced in May, following the announced in May, following the findings, we will be introducing an earned progression model based on a three-part sentence.

Under this model, offenders are released points will be determined by their behaviour. If they follow rules, behaviour. If they follow rules, they have earlier release, if they do not, they will be locked up for longer. This will not be true for all offenders. Those currently serving extended determinate sentences with automatic release point of 67 percent, the earliest release they can. Different for people who have early releases. We This will see more offenders taxed and under close supervision from privation.

This will tailored according to each offenders risk and crime type and bolstered beyond the current system with a set of new restrictive measures. And a major ramp up in tagging and probation investment. In the third part offenders will be monitored in the community by the probation and returned to prison if they breach their conditions. Alongside the progression model we are also taking forward the recommendations to introduce a presumption of suspenseful sentences. We will be investing in this model and intensive supervision to significantly increasing our patient funding through the spending review settlement and I welcome the comments from the member for Amber Valley and also the highlighting of third sector organisations that contribute in this space from the members for Bournemouth East and Ralon Bay.

Our additional investment Ralon Bay. Our additional investment will increase by £700 million by £700,000,000.20 28 allowing us to substantially increase the number of offenders on tax and ensure investment in services that address the drivers of offending.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

May I ask the Minister when there are these reports will they be capacity for more funding from

**** Possible New Speaker ****

recommendations? We await the lover's report and when the liver's report comes obviously the Lord Chancellor will come to the House to update the come to the House to update the House on those issues. Those sorts of things will be rightly dealt with then. On efficiencies the spending then. On efficiencies the spending review has given a settlement to the department which the Department will department which the Department will By applying all the appropriate measures to that.

Rest assured Madam Deputy Speaker, this government inherited a system creaking under pressure having suffered chronic underfunding for 14 years, the underfunding for 14 years, the Justice Committee is right to point out by 2016/17 the day-to-day budget of the Department had fallen by one third in real terms. That is why we third in real terms. That is why we are delivering an ambitious once in a generation reform of the justice

**** Possible New Speaker ****

a generation reform of the justice system but this country needs -- that this country needs with public safety at its core. With the leave of the House I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

With the leave of the House I call Andy Slaughter to wind up briefly. Thank you very much. I do not need to add any matters to my speech. Because the inevitable gaps in that were filled eloquently by the speakers. Can I just take two minutes to thank those who contributed to this debate. The member for Bridgwater, Colchester, Amber Valley, Roseman Hills, soluble -- Solihull and Eastbourne were his hat is, and all members of the Justice Committee and I thank them all for being here.

Indeed can I thank all members of the Justice Committee with exception for the member for Wells and the member who resumed distinguished Parliamentary career after a short gap. They are all new members. They all give a lot of time to this in addition to all of that which new members have to do full stock I thank all the members who have spoken for their forensic detection of the previous government in their failings in this area and particularly my friend who covered ground I did not have time in terms of the CCRC and I would like to thank her for what she does in chairing that a PG.

I also thank my honourable friend for Derby North for the access to Justice and other APPGs in the field. Can I even conclusion thank the Front Benchers for their contributions. My honourable friend for Eastbourne as a was very critical and constructive in what he says. Perhaps the honourable member would like to take that approach. No I did not think so. I enjoyed very much our time together on the shadow Justice Committee. I also enjoyed and enjoy in these debates taking every bad point but I think he should be kinder to the former Lord Chancellor David Gauke I think did a very good report.

I say to the Minister he was a very good friend of mine, thank you for this contribution, we know what a difficult job he has. That will not stop us being on his back all of the time to make sure the many problems that have been you.
15:06
15:07
Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Portrait Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP (North Cotswolds, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Many -- Madam Deputy Speaker may I thank you, and all of those who have been involved in selecting this debate today. Particularly appropriate in Armed Forces week. I appropriate in Armed Forces week. I would also like to pay tribute to the Minister and my honourable friend on the Frontbench for being here today to listen to the speech and hopefully the Minister for answering a few questions. I would like to pay tribute to the honourable member of Slough who is chairman of the defence Select Committee and would have actually joined me as a joint application in this debate but his committee have been away from Parliament.

On a visit. So, the defence budget is one of the most important estimates the House can debate and scrutinise. With war raging in Ukraine, the ongoing Israeli Gaza conflict and now what is happening in Iran, our world feels increasingly unstable. The Prime Minister has recently returned from the G7 and is now the NATO summit ensuring our interests align with our European AND American allies. Which is critical. As general Walker, chief of the general staff said last July, we must be ready for war within three years.

The rest of my speech I think is probably devoted to that theme. So first I would like to discuss the figures of the defence budget. I think most people in this House are pleased to see defence spending is now considered a priority. The Strategic Defence Review announced earlier in June was welcomed and confirmed defence spending will be going up from two% of GDP to 2.5% by April 27. An extra .1% going towards intelligence and security services country regions. There was a further commitment to increase defence spending to seven% of GDP in the next Parliament but it is noted no date has been set for this.

The new announcement by the Prime Minister at the NATO summit suggests the covenant will expect to spend five% of GDP on national security and defence by the end of the next Parliament or by 2035. Which includes three% core defence spending and 1.5% on resilience and security spending. I would like to ask members to bear with me while I just go through this somewhat complete catered figures and what they will involve. Malcolm placated figures and what they will involve.

One% of GDP is around 28 billion according to the House of Commons Library but hopefully our GDP will increase as the years go by. College should note critically -- colleagues should note critically a percentage increase in the budget is not the same as an increasing percentage of GDP. Hence the much higher figures I am about to go into. The current ministry of defence budget according to the Treasury Redbook 25/2662.2 billion. That is around 2.2% of GDP. The government to reach the needed 2.5% of GDP to do this by 2027 and set aside the fact the MOD budget does not quite align with the NATO compliant spending, the defence budget must increase to around 70 billion in 27/28.

With the extra 1.1% I mentioned earlier -- extra .1% I mentioned earlier that is an extra... An extra nine to £11 million needs to be found in the next two years. Moving further into the next Parliament, if we are to reach the three% of GDP figure in the next Parliament, the defence budget will need to equate to around 84 billion in current prices today. After the announcement today of 3.5% equating figures is 98 billion and core defence resilience is 42 billion.

Therefore the total spending by 2035 will need to be 140 billion. These calculations are also dependent on the GDP staying the same and not increasing. In which case the budget will of course increase as well. I simply would like to ask the Minister today, where is all of this money coming from? Because it is a huge amount of money. With the failure to produce the Defence Investment Plan along with the Strategic Defence Review, the SDR is merely a list of ambitions and aspirations with few receipts and invoices attached.

In the Ministerial Statement, I did ask the Secretary of State if he could confirm when we would be able to scrutinise the figures. But I understand the Defence Investment Plan is still an unfinished piece of work and not due to be published until the autumn. That is a long way off. As Chairman of the Public Accounts Commission, the committee are always looking at how effectively money is spent and whether it could be spent more effectively given the taxpayer best value for money and whether indeed it is feasible.

However the committee has not been able to fulfil that statutory role of scrutinising the defence spending for at least 12 months. The last Defence Equipment Plan was published in November 2022. They sent out a 10 year spending plan for equipment procurement. Which was about 300.5 .5 billion. -- 305.5 billion and there was a shortfall of money then available. Can I just finish this available. Can I just finish this sentence? Then of course I will give way.

I am pleased the Permanent Secretary did accept our invitation to come to the committee in April to discuss the appointment plan. -- Equipment plan. He did not come with any proposals as to how and when we might be able to scrutinise the defence expenditure. To see whether these huge aspirations were affordable on this budget or the next budget of three% or the following one of 3.5%. I think it is really important Parliament does actually have a timetable of when it will be able to do that scrutiny.

Happily.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am grateful to my honourable friend. He mentions the equipment plan. Does he share the defence plan. Does he share the defence select committee's frustrations that I think we mentioned last time in 2022 and is he aware when Lord 2022 and is he aware when Lord Robertson came to the defence committee to discuss the Strategic Defence Review last week he was surprised the Defence Committee was surprised the Defence Committee was being denied access to the equipment program is indeed the Public program is indeed the Public Accounts Committee is.

So government simply cannot help to be accountable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

they are spending their money on? My honourable friend has made the case very eloquently. I have also case very eloquently. I have also made it. Embers will have heard it and hopefully the Minister will have something positive to say about this in his summing up. Of course.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in his summing up. Of course. Thank you. To what extent does he believe that the situation is even believe that the situation is even worse than he has outlined? Because we know that inflationary pressures on defence bear far more heavily than on practically with the than on practically with the possible exception of healthcare. Any other part of public spending Any other part of public spending and yet I see no evidence in the defence review or anywhere else over the past 12 months of that being properly accounted for by Ministers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

or those who are advising him? My honourable friend must have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend must have read my mind because when I command of submarines I will mention this very factor of inflation in defence costs. The MOD has been reorganised costs. The MOD has been reorganised into four sections. There will be a Permanent Secretary in charge of the Permanent Secretary in charge of the department. The Chief of the Defence Staff will be in charge of all personnel matters. A new national personnel matters. A new national are Director will be in charge like are Director will be in charge like national armament Director will be in charge of everything digital and in charge of everything digital and research related and all matters to deal with what is now in the defence infrastructure Organisation.

And of course finally the defence nuclear course finally the defence nuclear organisation. Those are the four part. This particular debate focuses part. This particular debate focuses on the National Armaments Director and his appointment has been ongoing since it was announced on 17 December 24 last year and I am hopeful the Department might soon be hopeful the Department might soon be in a position to announce who they have selected to do the job. I have to say the job is very prestigious to say the job is very prestigious and very large one and it has a very large salary attached to it of £400,000.

So the National Armaments £400,000. So the National Armaments Director will be responsible as I said for defence procurement, all defence infrastructure Organisation including defence housing, digital and research. And it represents a huge part of the defence budget. He will have significantly more control over the acquisition process then his other two and I hope some of the announcements made will come to fruition including being able to go from a water contract and to your maximum. The department is hoping to do that by involving industry at a much earlier stage of the process.

So to help solve problems and rather than over specifying requirements this will actually streamline it and supervise the contract. This should also allow defence secretaries to export more equipment to international market which will in In In additional In additional to In additional to dynamics In additional to dynamics being awarded the contract they were also awarded the infamous battlefield awarded the infamous battlefield This has cost so far 820 This has cost so far 820 extended with modification and possibly 2035.

I think this may need a credible to get. In our defence system. I think the whole house will appreciate an update on where we are with our tri-service battlefield communication system and how they could be accelerated. Another contract the proceeds all scrutiny is the early-morning control aircraft. -- Early war control aircraft. As we share costs with our NATO allies, the Pentagon has labelled the East 17 expensive old plated and not survivable in armament battlefield. Again we would be great will to the Minister for As I said in answer to my statement today, the government committed to buying more F-35 aircraft, 12 F-35 A and 15 F 30 5Bs.

This will be an alternative to the Seabourn nuclear capability. Another huge commitment as part of the SDR is commitment to as part of the SDR is commitment to invest in up to 12 new AUKUS submarines. They are due to be in operation of the 2030s and 2040s with a submarine being built every 18 months but there are huge challenges ahead due to it being a new class of submarines and lack of capacity at Barrow-in-Furness. No cost for a submarine has ever been disclosed and this program is likely to take more than 10 years.

We really need to see some of the detail. It's the deal underpinned by the government's eventual commitment to increase expenditure to three percent in the next Parliament? So we can see whether it is feasible and we can see whether, I would be grateful if the Minister can confirm this, talking about long in service dates as I was with the F-35's earlier on, the Minister agreed with this, we need to see the earlier work in feasibility, contracts, beginning as soon as possible to meet this long tail into buying and building and commissioning the submarines.

This strategically important contract, when costs are announced, will need leadership from the National armaments director to ensure it remains on track and on budget. The Public Accounts Committee asked for an update by the end of 2026 which will demonstrate how well public procurement has improved under the first year of the National armaments group. Nuclear is important when looking at the nuclear enterprise budget, in 2024 the budget was 10.9 billion, around 18 percent of the whole budget. The 10 year costs have increased by 10 billion from 117.8 billion to 128 billion.

It is not clear whether the additional 15 billion announced in the SDR committed to the warhead is included in the figure. The budget is rising due to various factors, technical factors, but inflation and the speed of manufacturing, which we now need to build these submarines now need to build these submarines act to meet the timetable that is absolutely necessary for our defence. The budget is one of the few that is left and scrutinised due to the sensitive nature of these contracts.

But as chairman of the PAC I am constitutionally obliged to see the detail. Ongoing, this needs to be resolved and I'm grateful to the commitment of the Secretary of State working towards a solution. Sensitive scrutiny has never been more important due to the context of these figures I announced earlier. Defence personnel is another important part of the budget. The budget has had to increase by 14.3 billion to pay for the treasuries national insurance employer tax rise.

The number of people leaving the Armed Forces is far to high. Last year for every 100 personnel we were recruiting... This is unsustainable. The SDR commits to increasing Armed Forces to 76,000. The PAC recently held a session on reserve forces which the SDR clarifies the government wants to increase the number of cadets by 30 percent and critical service by 20 percent. I would be grateful if the government could confirm how much this would cost. We do need to make joining the Armed Forces are much more attractive option than it currently is.

Some of the defence housing I have seen frankly a prisoner would get better and safer conditions. Much of it has mould, rust, leaks. This must change if we want to improve the retention and recruitment of our Armed Forces in giving them a better package of remuneration and conditions of service. I welcome the 1 1/2 billion to improve defence housing as part of the SDR and 6.1 billion that has been spent on repurchase 35,000 homes following the landmark deal. This will allow the MoD to undertake major improvement schemes.

Another issue with recruitment is the length of time it takes to roll service personnel into training. We used to have an Armed Forces recruitment centre in every High Street of the country, people could walk in off the streets, sign up, wear uniform in two weeks. There are now stories of recruitment taking over six months, which is not good enough. We need to look further afield to ensure the military has the right skills for the future. Cyber warfare is becoming an increasing and real threat.

I believe the MoD could do more to recruit with eye and digital skills that would not necessarily meet the medical and fitness requirements needed for entry for normal military personnel. In conclusion... Yes, very briefly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would he comment on the government's enthusiasm or otherwise for the review of careers in the for the review of careers in the Armed Forces? Which was carried out under the last government and was put in train by the last government put in train by the last government but we hear there has perhaps been backsliding since. Which is a pity, since the review was magisterial and since the review was magisterial and had already shown signs through zigzag careers spectrum of service zigzag careers spectrum of service of being appealing to servicemen and servicewomen and holding them in, servicewomen and holding them in, both the regulars and reserves.

It's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

both the regulars and reserves. It's a pity we did not have the process to continue. I cannot tell what is on the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I cannot tell what is on the government's mind. Maybe the Minister will be able to tell us this afternoon. Given the SDR makes it clear they want to increase the numbers of our Armed Forces considerably, we have to consider every aspect of recruiting and retaining more of those. retaining more of those. Particularly when they have skills, making sure they do not just leave the army or Armed Forces as soon as the army or Armed Forces as soon as they have got those skills.

I think this is a really important issue my honourable friend is raised. There is no greater duty upon the government than defending the nation. Yet for all members of this House and the general public, we need to have confidence that our Armed Forces are properly equipped to do the job. This does not mean we complacently give into every demand, but it is the role of members to carefully scrutinise the defence budget, wasting spending and shortfalls are stopping our Armed shortfalls are stopping our Armed Forces for keeping safe in the most safe ways dash make effective ways.

There needs to be more information on finances in a timely manner so we can thoroughly scrutinise them and ensure Parliament that our Armed Forces are able to do their job in the most effective way, with world beating equipment.
15:26
Graeme Downie Portrait Graeme Downie MP (Dunfermline and Dollar, Labour)
-
-
It is welcome that today's debate focuses on the national armaments director and comes as the Prime Minister attends the NATO summit when we are likely to see a greater focus on the need for action on defence spending. It is not all about press release, the national armaments director will allow the UK to focus on how money is being spent to increase the modality of the Armed Forces and ensure that the UK Armed Forces is sufficient to prevent a war no one in this chamber wants to see.

Greater focus on procurement and industrial planning, cracking down on waste and boosting Britain's defence industry. I want to see a move as quickly as possible. Only by doing that can we make sure adversaries know we are working on our own defence. I want the Minister to provide clarification and ensure that these are some of the first priorities for the armaments director and the Ministry of Defence. Scotland's position,... Threats to underwater cables in the Atlantic. The strategic defense review highlighted the importance to improve NATO's deterrence in the North.

And secretary general Mark Rutte talked about defence in the high North. The SDR spoke of the need for an always on supply learning for shipbuilding -- supply line. A simpler and cheaper fleet. The type 31 frigate is being built in my constituency would fit the bill for that move, along with providing requirement for always on supply shipbuilding. The first type 31 HMS was floated off and other ships ordered by the Royal Navy are progressing well.

Can I take this opportunity to thank the workforce for the contribution they make to our nation's defence in the construction of type 31 and the incredible work they do for us and our American allies. Can they confirm the armaments director will consider the need for more type 31 frigates? There have been many discussions in this place, particularly from the Member for Durham North, regarding the need to improve the UK's air defence capability. This is also with the capability.

This is also with the sky news podcast, with experts and advisers, I have been listening to for the last couple of weeks. Improving the capability will require a number of solutions with allies. Part of that has been suggested that the future dominance would be part of countering the threat from hypersonic missiles. With this threat in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East, can the Minister update on those As part of a increase in defence spending, it is vital we make defence an engine for growth, boosting prosperity, jobs and growth in every corner of the UK.

That we are strengthening the UK's industrial base to better deter adversaries and make the UK secure at home and strung abroad. Engaging all parts of society and business, including the growing network of high-tech and skilled manufacturers in my own constituency, across Scotland and the UK. We heard from the Secretary of State business and trade of the exciting prospect of difference growth fund which could bring together different parts to deliver combined objective of economic investment and improving defence. This could include opportunities for Fife Council, five College, both which could play a role in delivering on defence and providing the skills and training young people need and deserve.

This is a topic I have raised already, we have seen failure of the SNP government in areas such as skills and infrastructure. We have the position of senior people in the SNP saying it is party policy that public money should not be spent on military equipment. The SNP responding to a request from the Ukrainian government by dictating it could not be used on military casualties. A preposterous decision and detached from reality that put Scotland security at risk as well as reducing opportunities for young people in my own constituency.

Can I asked the Minister for updates in her discussions with Department for Business and Trade on the funds, and how that could benefit the people of Scotland as the SNP have failed to do so far? The government responded brilliantly to the global threats, building alliances, partnerships across the world and with the national armaments director and reorganisation already today, and the previous statements from the Front Bench. I hope we can accelerate as fast as we can along the path to make sure we meet those threats as the British public expect threats as the British public expect threats as the British public expect
15:31
Neil Shastri-Hurst Portrait Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst MP (Solihull West and Shirley, Conservative)
-
-
This House will quite properly consider the scale and seriousness of the threats we face. From conventional deterrence in Europe, to strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific, the case for strengthening armed forces is not just compelling but essential. We must also be honest about how we found the renewal. And what you are willing to sacrifice in the process of doing so. Let me be clear, the case for increased defence spending is self-evident. I come along with many others, have long argued we must invest more in our sovereign capability, in critical munitions, advanced deterrence, and National Resilience Review this includes expanding their remit and resourcing of the National Armaments Director, a role whose strategic significance has grown substantially in today's volatile security environment.

The National Armaments Director is not merely a procurement official, they are the principal architect of our Defence Industrial Strategy, responsible for ensuring our Armed Forces are equipped not just adequately but decisively. Their portfolio expands capability planning, acquisition reform, export ability, and the stewardship of our defence supply base. From the factory floor to the frontline. In an age of contested logistics, technologic disruption, and rapid rearmament by authoritarian regimes, the role is fundamental to preserving operational readiness and the sovereign capability.

Delivering a credible deterrent in today's world with accelerating procurement cycles, building on regularity and accountability, strengthening domestic supply chains, and striving long-term collaboration between government, industry, and academia. government, industry, and academia. It means ensuring that we can serve production of the crisis, replenish stockpiles at speed, and invest in the innovation it gives us full strategic edge. This cannot be done in isolation or as an afterthought. It must be led, coordinated, embedded, across defence planning. Not in spite of fiscal pressures but because of them.

If we are serious about resilience, serious about readiness, and serious about regeneration, we must empower the National Armaments Director with the authority, capacity, and resources to act not simply as a technical overseer but as a strategic enabler at the heart of defence policy. Only then can we translate spending into real-world capability. And ensure that British power is not only credible on paper but deliverable in practice. I must be equally clear that this investment must not come at the expense International Development commitments.

To fund defence by cutting foreign aid is a force economy. Worst it risks undermining the strategic posture we seek to build. Aid is not an indulgence, it is not a soft option, and it is certainly not a luxury. It is an instrument of our national strategy. A projection of British values, a tool for soft power, and a forward deployed asset in the defence of the realm. When Britain pulls back from the world, adversaries do not hesitate to step in.

China in particular. It does not wait for crises to send in troops, it sends an investment, infra structure, influence will stop often to the very regions from which we have retreated. When we reduce aid, we do not save but we cede ground. We create vacuums that others are all too willing to fill. Let's be frank, foreign aid and defence are not in conflict. They are complimentary. One builds resilience, prevents crises and support allies, the other protects us as those crises unfold.

A truly strategic posture requires both as real security does not start when the first shot is fired. It starts in the classrooms and conflict zones, in the clinics of fragile states, and in the partnerships we forge for troubled take root. If we choose to retreat from the world, we should find that the world does not retreat from us.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Mr Speaker. My husband was an army Reservist in
15:36
Catherine Atkinson Portrait Catherine Atkinson MP (Derby North, Labour)
-
-
was an army Reservist in Afghanistan, and he has not told me a great deal about what his job entailed but he has told me about taking helicopter flights, hugging close to the mountain's where the burnt out Soviet tanks ghostly guard. His interactions with the Afghan army and the civilians, and buying bread from locals and visiting children treated in hospital. It can be a throw are phrase used by politicians to say, "Our Armed Forces are the best in the world, " but it is one that I stand by.

And I know that so many of the families of our Armed Forces both in Derby across country stand by it too. As we celebrate Armed Forces Week in Derby I will be thinking of them. But it is absolutely essential that our Armed Forces have kicked and arms and technology that they need. In my view, those who serve our national security by working in the defence industry, and their families, and also have their contributions celebrated too. We are in a new era of threats.

Which demands a new era for UK defence. So it is absolutely right that this government has announced the largest sustained increase to defence spending to the end of the Cold War. And has already boosted defence spending by £5 billion this year. As the government increases defence spending, it is making defence and engine for growth. Boosting prosperity, jobs, and growth in every corner of the UK. Over the last few weeks, Derby has been mentioned many times in this chamber.

It is one city of many that is benefiting from the government's commitment to defence and security, in creating the skilled secure jobs that we see in our city and across Derbyshire and East Midlands too. The UK based firms will be prioritised for government investment under the new Defence Industrial Strategy, to drive economic growth and boost British jobs and strengthen national security. But under the last government, small businesses often felt locked out of defence. And just 4% of government defence spend went to small and enterprises.

I believe this government is right in prioritising government investment for UK based firms, under the new industrial defence strategy. So we can drive growth and jobs. And have specific support to open the door to small businesses. Derby has a large part to play because we make things in Derby. Rolls-Royce in Derby was known to have recreated an engine first produced in 1936 and used in Lancaster bombers and Spitfires and Hurricanes. We also had Rolls-Royce submarines in Derby, who have built the nuclear reactors that power our sea deterrent.

UK submarines are the most awesome and lethal machines in the world history. I believe in the power of politics and the power of negotiation to preserve peace, a peace we all desperately want to see. But we have to acknowledge that our submarines, the sheer size and power of them has spoken more loudly than words for over 60 years. And they help underwrite our security. Because we can't wish away the threats that exist and are growing, and we have to deter them.

Time and time again our prime minister has confirmed security and defence is the first duty of the government. That priority can be seen in the investment that is being made. And from submarines to drones, Derby has a major role to play in supporting the government to make and keep Britain safe, secure at home, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

strong abroad. Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you
15:41
John Cooper Portrait John Cooper MP (Dumfries and Galloway, Conservative)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you for I have been banging on about the need to mobilise which industry as need to mobilise which industry as we ramp up for possible conflict in an increasingly hostile world. I welcome the news that the new National Armaments Director is being resourced to oversee the alliance of our military brains and brawn with the sinews of British defence industry. Civilians talk tactics, veterans talk logistics, and we know that a modern army is depending not so much on its stomach is on a long supply chain and could in small and medium-sized enterprises was top this extends, to use the military's favourite phrase, to all domains.

We have seen the reality of modern warfare, from the hell of trenches in occupied Ukraine to the arid highlands of Iran. We have seen high-tech systems, drones, cyber, space, and stealth undergo a baptism of fire. But we have also seen weapons that would have been familiar to my infantry grandfather in Gallipoli in 1915, apply that trade to deadly effect will stop artillery remains the Queen of the battlefield. While our sailors, soldiers, and aircrew at the tip of the spear, the essential shaft is the spear, the essential shaft is our factories and shipyards.

They know that every corner of the country can play their part. There is bad news from Scotland under the SNP. The Nationalists and the Green Party fellow travellers have engendered a hostile environment for defence firms. We have seen young apprentices denied entrance to the Holyrood parliament by an elected representative tips now to lead the Green Party. In recent days we have seen the former First Minister Humza Yousaf, still SNP, blundering around the world stage and allowing US military aircraft to refuel and bemoaning the prescription of the saboteurs of the Palestine Action.

There is a presumption that the Scottish Government will not channel funding towards ordinance, a battlefield pre-requisite. That led this government to step in to say there will help fund a new Rolls- Royce centre of welding excellent, full submarine and warship building was the stakes could not be higher. Scotland is already a defence powerhouse. Umbrella body ADS estimate 68,250 people in Scotland and the sector reducing Royal Navy ships, of atomic masks, and smart missiles such as Storm Shadow. My old constituency produces the helmets vital for F-35 fighter- bombers, of which we are purchasing 12 more alpha variants.

Some 2023 show the MoD spending £270 per person living in Scotland. It is ought to be Britain's Arsenal. And Scotland should be top of the entry for the National Armaments Director. Yet firms wanting to set up the new ordnance factories recommended in the SDR, or seeking to expand to fill new MoD orders cannot count on financial support via the Scottish Government. Whose side is Scotland's first Minister on? And Can the minister here tell the House what powers the new armaments director will have to eliminate the Scottish Government reckless policies on defence?
15:45
Tom Hayes Portrait Tom Hayes MP (Bournemouth East, Labour)
-
-
Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to start by thanking everyone in our Armed Forces who serves, who has served, and who has fallen. Our country is safer and better because of their service. In assessing the financial necessity of meeting our defence needs, it is important first of all to take a look at the state of our world. That involves a look at not only our real adversaries but are potential adversaries. Moreover, our allies and the most powerful country in the world, the United States.

I want to do this because I think the two often in our country and across the world, there is an assumption that somehow the foreign policy of the current president will be a blip. And I don't believe that to be so. I want to spend a little time talking about this because I think it is important for my constituents and also for the House. To reflect on the reality, as this country and government sentence path towards a long-term investment in towards a long-term investment in After being dismissed as a phenomenon of a great power leaving, so is the strategy by President Trump.

The most important strategic process affecting the patient is to do with Paris and a revisionist foreign policy. This is according to the national security strategy released by President Biden. In a year that defined cooperation -- a bill that helped define the era was ended by President Trump. Two contrasting presidencies, two sides of the same coin. As Russia legally invaded Ukraine, a sovereign democratic country, China made clear its designs on Taiwan, a sovereign democratic country, those countries have strengthened their ties and collaborated against other US rivals.

The main priority of American foreign policy's great competition is clear, aspiration of the outcome that the US stays ahead of the pack is clear. We in this House will debate the motivations and the character of the behaviour of President Trump. It will be open to interpretation. In some important ways, his worldview is a more settled nature. With him and Joe Biden as President and the US is a great, pursuing US interests is an enduring feature, and for some time, we have been hearing a story about how America sees itself and the world.

We would be foolish to see this as a blip. It is a continuation of a tradition. Of course there are differences in the presidency in terms of the approach to diplomacy and the assessment of American interest and how aggressively it should be preferred and in terms of American values and how devoted they should be held and in terms of collaborating with countries like the UK, it is been seen as a means or an end, to pursue economic or an end, to pursue economic strength.

The presidency and presidents do not differ in assessments of the international system and the need for competition. This is a critical point that defines UK Defence decisions this year and subsequent years. I have a preference for a particular style of behaviour. I would much prefer the President Biden form of foreign policy. The outcomes that are being pursued are clear. This begs the question, whoever succeeds President Trump, will be deviate from or continue this foreign policy? I would argue that it will be continuation.

If the priority of the UK's closest ally is to stay ahead of those autocracies and we have stronger ties and shared values with the US, it is in our interest to do all we can to counter the rise of those rivals and mitigate against their was behaviours and legislate against threats to our values and the US were possible and other democracies to make the same assessment of the threat. That is why it is so important that we are investing in Defence capabilities.

We are making the largest increase to Defence spending, have boosted Defence spending by £5 billion this year. We are committed to achieving year. We are committed to achieving 4.1% of spending by GDP by 2027 and 5% by 2035 and I commend that strongly, giving the international circumstances that we face. It is important to do and it is important in this House to educate our constituencies about why it is so important. In this House, it's important to bring direct scrutiny to Defence decisions.

I want. Please sit down. It's important to bring the right scrutiny to decisions and Defence strategy and it is important that across this House that we conduct ourselves in an appropriate fashion. In advancing our Defence and security, we should be united and as a House, we have to come together to find solutions to a lack of unity in a cross-party B. We have marked the 80th anniversary of VE Day this year. The memory is not enough. Imagine a world without victory in Europe, world where tyranny had triumphed in darkness had endured.

Look at the world today, autocracies divide and deceive and freedoms are lost. We have a responsibility to those who lost be vigilant and that means vigilance against autocracies and against misjudgement, miscalculation, misadventure. That is why all of us have an important role to play in making sure this decision is made and it means being a strong democracy and growing economically and securing clean homegrown energy, investing in new technologies and equipping the military with the tools and technology that they need.

It means being a true ally and telling allies around the world that things are not working. Giving allies reason to listen and speaking with the affection and wisdom of an old country that has known what it is to rise, to navigate uncertainty, to be attacked at home, to know the issues with freedom being imperilled, to decline from great power but, nonetheless, work with allies and partners to secure freedom in the world against very difficult circumstances. circumstances. circumstances.
15:53
Lincoln Jopp Portrait Lincoln Jopp MP (Spelthorne, Conservative)
-
-
When I rose to give my maiden speech just under one year ago, I took the opportunity to express my frustration that the government had announced a spending review which was going to essentially buy the political cover to get to 2.5% of GDP and the frustration expressed at the time was that the dogs in the street new that we needed 2.5% and we essentially wasted the best part of a year discussing. The evidence for that is clear.

When Lord Robertson came in front of the Defence Committee and kicked off the Strategic Defence Review, I asked them, when Lord Robertson did the prior review, he was very clear that it should be threat-based and led by foreign policy but this one seemed to say the answer was 2.5%, what is the question. It proved, because partway through the Strategic Defence Review, the government said, Defence Review, the government said, "What can you get for 3% by the next Parliament." And then they talked about 2034, 3.5%, and, as the Prime Minister turned up at the NATO summit, we got the mystery bump up to 5% for Defence and security.

My suspicion, perhaps cynically, is suspicion, perhaps cynically, is that 1.5% is made up of 0.75% smoke and 0.25% mirrors. It would be churlish to question that while spending on Defence is going up and what is important is to concentrate on how it is to be spent and I just want to remind the House of an exchange that place the other day with the Chief of the Defence Staff at the Defence Committee after the Defence Review because we come from a position of strength and this expenditure will simply make us stronger and more secure.

I said, obviously I don't expect you to know the answer to the question, but if I were to ask you how many working tanks we have got, and then when I asked, he batted away, and then he said, and I quote, "I suppose my cautionary be that while we are charged with the nation's security and safety, it may be that having 50 or 100 tanks will not be the defining factor as to whether the country remains safe. To me, that is a problem.

I come back to this, is our readiness at this stage will be play a part with NATO partners to deal with the deterrent for Russia and be confident about that." The problem at the micro example as it skips over the security construct, that we are the beneficiary of a collective group, nations in Europe, never mind 50 thanks of the modest increase in the army, they are increasing their army by tens of thousands and tanks by hundreds. I would suggest to the Minister that she is wary of the voices she might be getting from certain parts of the MoD that that is the attitude to the fact we have very few working tanks because she and the Prime Minister would like some options beyond reaching for the nuclear button.

There has to be something in between and I hope that she takes that forward in conversations with the National Armament Director and discusses priorities. I asked the Minister for Defence Procurement whether they would have free range to rip up the book when it comes to defence procurement because the book certainly needs to be torn up. As well as serving on four tours of Northern Ireland, first and second Gulf war, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, I also squeezed in five years that the Ministry of Defence and I'm sure the Minister is aware that there is a thing called the conspiracy of optimism which takes place in equipment planning.

What happens is equipment planning. What happens is people in uniform will tell part truths to the Minister about how much things will cost to get them into the programme and it is called entries and it has been going on for years and then, all of a sudden, the same people come back and say, "I'm afraid the aircraft carriers will not cause the £2 billion we told you, but £6 billion." What are you going to do? It has been announced and counselling would cause political pain.

I urged her to rip up the rulebook and the chairman said £400,000 and I think they will be a similar amount for a bonus and I think we have got to be worth that and I do not want them coming back to us to give evidence a year after the initial appointment to say that they wanted to change things but the were not allowed to. My final point, it was quite telling but obviously, alongside the point with the National Armaments Director, we had Defence from going on and when Lord Robertson came back to the committee having published the Strategic Defence Review, I asked about the culture change required in the whole of the reform of Defence and Lord Robertson told an interesting story about when Colin Powell moved from uniform into politics and he was asked how to bring about a culture change in an organisation that has gone and the wrong direction and Colin Powell asked how you stop a column of ants and his answer was that you stamp on the first 10.

I think the Minister has to prepare herself for some seriously robust conversations with the MoD, everyone is going to be spent wisely and honestly when things are going bad. honestly when things are going bad. And it is going to bring about the effect on the input that we all desire.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is a privilege to rise today during Armed Forces Week and have a during Armed Forces Week and have a moment of recognition for the extraordinary contribution of our
16:00
James Naish Portrait James Naish MP (Rushcliffe, Labour)
-
-
extraordinary contribution of our Armed Forces and speak about the importance of the Defence industry on Estimate Day. Across the country, from school assemblies, to community events, today, people pay tribute to the men and women who have served our nation with distinction and I reference my uncle Donald who died in 2016 but joined the Armed Forces as a youngster, straight from school. He left at 21 after a schizophrenic breakdown which ultimately defined the rest of his life but, like so many veterans, he remained extremely proud of his time in the army, and the role he played, We will mark Armed Forces Week with Proms in the Park, and both events will be celebrated.

It will bring together families, veterans, and the wider community to show their gratitude and support for those who serve. It is these local heartfelt gatherings that remind us that defence is not an abstract concept. It is about people, about communities, about the security that we enjoy because of the historic and ongoing sacrifice of others. In today's Estimates Day debate, I want to speak both to reforms underway and to the broader vision that the government has two rebuilding Britain's security and supporting jobs at home.

As I said in a recent newspaper article on Defence, we are now firmly in a new era for defence. One defined not just by increasing geopolitical threats, as has already been described by a number of members, but by a determination to face them with seriousness, strategy, and solidarity. This government has committed to the largest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War. Already boosting spending by £5 billion this year, and setting out a path to 2.5% of GDP and beyond.

We have today heard about reaching 5% of GDP on defence and security by 2035. I think it is important that this House is able to scrutinise the trajectory towards getting to those targets. Thankfully this government has already taken some shorter term tactical steps that I welcome. This includes the largest pay rise to service personnel in 20 years, establishing the new independent Armed Forces Commissioner to improve service life, and spending an extra £1.5 billion on a record uplift to fix substandard forces housing.

Just as importantly, we are thinking differently and changing how things operate. Ending waste, rebuilding capability, and making defence and engine of growth across the country. This is basically notable in my constituency in the south of constituency in the south of Nottingham. Many of my constituents work for Rolls-Royce, and on their behalf I welcome both the £9 billion Unity contract announced in January this year, to design, manufacture and serve in-service support for nuclear reactors that power the Royal Navy's fleet of submarines.

My honourable friend from Derby North agrees, I welcome confirmation that Rolls-Royce will receive money to produce the first small modular reactor which is key to our energy security. Both these announcements are good news for thousands of people in my region, in the East Midlands, who will be part of the supply chain for these two iconic developments. We cannot confront 21st-century threats to 20th-century systems. The hardfought lessons from Putin's illegal invasion of Ukraine reminds us that the military is only as strong as the industrial and technological base that supports it.

That is why I applaud the ministers and civil servants for their work on the Strategic Defence Review, and the defence reform program. At the heart of these reforms is the creation of a new National Armaments Director, to lead a unified group responsible for procurement, research, support, and innovation was this is a long overdue

**** Possible New Speaker ****

developer. Does he agree that the new

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does he agree that the new National Armaments Director should have is one of the priorities making have is one of the priorities making sure that the very welcome uplift in spending by this government means spending by this government means that SMEs really do get a fair share that SMEs really do get a fair share of that uplift, and changes things for constituencies like mine with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for constituencies like mine with there are many small and medium- sized businesses that will benefit. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for the intervention. I was just about to go on to the fact that previous government any two of 49 major defence projects were delivered on time. But also SMEs have been locked time. But also SMEs have been locked out of the process. So he is right to highlight the importance of to highlight the importance of changing that. The new Defence Industrial Strategy put UK-based firms at the heart of procurement, firms at the heart of procurement, ensuring government investment strengthens our national security strengthens our national security and supports good jobs at home.

That is great news for places like is great news for places like Rushcliffe, as I have said, given it sits at the heart of the East Midlands manufacturing base. Which is home to firms in aerospace, engineering, and precision technology, all of which are well placed to contribute to our defence in the future. Importantly this new direction not only opens the door to a better relationship with new businesses, but for SMEs in Nottinghamshire, should be able to be prime contractors. Defence will be accessible, it will be collaborative, and it will be responsive.

We will be able to tackle long timelines, improve communication, and of course we need to invest in skills. As a member of Parliament for Rushcliffe I will continue to champion policies that bring jobs, investments, and innovation to the East Midlands. Defence must absolutely be part of that equation. Our region has a proud industrial heritage and a bright technological future if opportunities like this are developed. Finally I want to return to where I began, our armed forces. All of these reforms, strategies, and spending commitments back today.

The people that we asked to defend our democracy, do hold international law, and to respond at moments of crisis. We owed them not just words of thanks during Armed Forces Week but action, investment, and reform every week of the year. Madame Deputy Speaker, this Labour government is serious about defence. Serious about keeping Britain secure at home and strong abroad. After years of drift we are delivering the long-term decisions needed to safeguard our country and support our communities. We are not just patching up a broken system.

We are building a modern resilient and forward-looking defence into, one that reflects the values of our Armed Forces and the aspirations of our country. I would like to welcome the steps the government is taking

**** Possible New Speaker ****

today and is doing through this. Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Today's debate takes place at a moment of acute global instability. moment of acute global instability. moment of acute global instability. With the war still raging in Ukraine, mounting threats from hostile states and unreliable security partner in the White House. The world is more dangerous than it The world is more dangerous than it has been in a generation. In that context, the liberal Democrats will be welcome the government's commitment to increase defence spending to 5% by 20 increase
16:08
Helen Maguire Portrait Helen Maguire MP (Epsom and Ewell, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
defence spending to 5% by 2027. The government subsidy equipment to a new NATO target of 5% is the right decision. It reflects a recognition of the threats and environments we find ourselves in on what is necessary to support Britain's long-term defence. It remains the case however that the government is still playing catch up on questions of the nation's security. The last Conservative government put the army down by 10,000 troops, that decision was shortsighted and irresponsible. Despite that, the government has dragged its feet on rebuilding the strength and size of army said there will be no expansion to army numbers beyond 73,000 troops until the next Parliament.

In the context of the threats we faced the time lag can only be summarised as a day late and pounds short. The British Army remains one of the strongest deterrents we have the government can commit to fully supporting it. I welcome the government's shift in tone, I want to urge ministers to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

commit to a much more rapid reverse of troop cuts. Thank you for giving way. The Strategic Defence Review does mention that there will at some mention that there will at some point be an increase in the size of the army if funds allow. She not agree with me that actually now we agree with me that actually now we are doing 3.5% of GDP on defence, we can as Kirith Entwistle rate that can as Kirith Entwistle rate that shift, grow the size of the army now in order to provide deterrent effect?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

effect? I agree that it would help our deterrence if we could increase deterrence if we could increase troop numbers. On this, the Liberal Democrats are calling for the new Democrats are calling for the new bonus scheme to recruit 3000 personnel allowing the government to reach their target of 73,000 trained reach their target of 73,000 trained troops as soon as possible, meaning army numbers can be grown further and faster beyond that. I encourage

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and faster beyond that. I encourage the Minister to consider the proposals. I thank her. I completely agree

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank her. I completely agree that we need to see a rise in troop numbers, but the challenge with many numbers, but the challenge with many government policies, is not only setting the important policy but setting the important policy but saying how you would pay for it. So I do just want to invite her to set out what the Liberal Democrats plan is to pay for the proposals that she is making, please let not say that it will be a digital service tax like all of the other policies.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable Member will know it is a maximum £60 million which is insignificant to the entire defence budget was the getting us to that 76,000 as soon as possible will help us in the deterrents. The government has promised a new Defence has promised a new Defence Investment Plan for the autumn. It will provide a vital opportunity for clarity to be provided on how it made sure the shortage of equipment made sure the shortage of equipment across the Armed Forces address.

There remain serious questions about why the government did not think it appropriate to have a Defence Equipment Plan alongside the SDR earlier this month. Any and all earlier this month. Any and all efforts should be made to excel are the publication of these publications so that parliamentarians have an opportunity to scrutinise the government's proposal at the earliest opportunity. The threats we face to our security means that the our security means that the government cannot afford to delay. With President Trump casting doubt With President Trump casting doubt on US support in NATO, the UK must lead in Europe.

That means moving lead in Europe. That means moving faster to meet the 5% target which is currently proposed beyond the is currently proposed beyond the life of the next Parliament. I want to urge the Minister to have cross- party talks so the whole House can agree pathways to high levels of defence spending which job security defence spending which job security demands. As tension as attention goes on to this we must not lose sight of Putin. We are sitting on £25 billion of frozen Russian assets.

Across the G7 it rises to £300 billion. I recent visit to Estonia, I cannot emphasise how strongly they are asking England to develop plans to support Belgium in unlocking these assets and leading from the front and seizing assets in the UK. Liberal Democrats want the UK to work with allies to see these assets, and place them in cranes reconstruction and defence will stop if Putin's imperialism is to stop you must act decisively and boldly now. We also need a strategy that looks beyond the battlefield and it must mean supporting our veterans, service families and the defence industry too.

Liberal Democrats put in place a long-term Industrial Strategy protecting sovereign capability, providing certainty to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

industry and ensuring investment in R&D, training and jobs. I thank my honourable friend for giving way. But she joined me in giving way. But she joined me in urging the government to award the New Medium Helicopter contract to Leonardo in Yeovil in my constituency? Defence includes supporting jobs and apprenticeships and for firms across the south-west.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and for firms across the south-west. The defence industry is incredibly important and I know how important it is to your important it is to your important it is to your constituency. We also need... We would end the scandal of poor service hazards by requiring the MoD service hazards by requiring the MoD to provide housing above the minimum legal standards. No one who puts their life on the line for this their life on the line for this country should be dealing with leaks or mould full stop we will extend access to military health services access to military health services including mental health support veterans and tackle discrimination and problems in the Armed Forces by and problems in the Armed Forces by implementing the review recommendations.

As the US has recommendations. As the US has become a political ally, UK has a greater response billeting to lead, to stand with allies and act to stand with allies and act decisively. We must now move faster to restore and grow our Armed Forces, reverse past cuts and address the sovereign capabilities and military needs. UK must rise to the challenge standing with Ukraine, securing our alliances and building resilience to protect our people in the face of a more dangerous world.
16:14
James Cartlidge Portrait James Cartlidge MP (South Suffolk, Conservative)
-
-
Shadow defence secretary. estimates debate. I am grateful to the chair of the PAC committee for securing this debate of the Backbench Business Committee. In time it perfectly for both the NATO summit and Armed Forces Week. Given the threats we face from Russia and the incivility the Middle East and elsewhere, it is welcome in principle that NATO states have agreed to increase spending at this week's summit. Nevertheless, in terms of what the government's announcement means for UK defence expenditure, we must be clear that talk of 5% on national security and 3.5% on defence is nothing but a cold.

Unadulterated smoke and mirrors, where what we need is real investment at real pace to produce a real step change in our deterrence. Consider first the promise 5% on national security by 2035. Consisting of 3.5% on the core defence budget and 1.5% on resilience and security. The Prime Minister confirmed on GB News yesterday that the 1.5 percent is already being spent. Not a penny of new money, not a penny of it spent on actual military capability. As for the core defence budget, Labour have promised 3.5% in 10 years time.

But the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster confirmed on yesterday's media round that there is no plan to fund this increase. There won't be fund this increase. There won't be What about the plan for 3% in the next Parliament? The authors of the Strategic Defence Review wrote on 2 June that the decision, "Established the affordability of recommendations across the 10-year program." The problem is the government no longer have the plan to fund 3% in the decade than in the years leading up to bits about winning the promises to bits about winning the promises were dead on arrival at the headline pledge of up to 10 nuclear submarines, a fantasy fleet based on fantasy funding.

Most worryingly, the smoke and mirrors are not just being used for spending. One thing that is not being shared is the quantum of money that has been moved from the Intelligence budget to Defence but as far as we can see, Labour will not spend the 2.5% they have promised by 2027. To recap, in his statement in February, the Prime Minister confirmed that intelligence spending would be added to the core Defence budget, taking it to 2.6% but, by our reckoning, that is the equivalent of almost 0.2% of GDP.

Subtracting that from 2.6 gives a figure of just over 2.4%. The smoke and mirrors do not end there. The 2.4% will have to cover the cost of Chagos and will rise to a total of £30 billion. That 2.4% below so have to include spending on election interference and other non- ODA expenditure which was confirmed would be added to the budget. If 2.6 is in the region of 2.4%, that will mean that the increase in Defence spending to 2027 is not the biggest since the Cold War because it will be less than Boris Johnson in 2019.

Labour have announced this, no new money in the 1.5% for security and resilience but reclassification of existing spending. The plan to get to 3.5% on the core defence budget by 2035, now plan to get to 3% on the core Defence budget in the next Parliament at the detail of the review confirmed that when spending had they supported figure of 2.6% in 2027, it does not increase towards 3% but stays flat. Worse than that, it does not get to 2.6% on Defence at all, but something like 2.4%, at best.

Smoke and mirrors at every turn. If there is one thing worse than the lack of substance in the spin on Defence from labour, it is the lack of urgency. The promises are all about 2035, a decade away, the threats are real and imminent. As the chair of the PAC said in his speech, we must be ready for a war within three years, not a decade, five years, but three. We were promised a bigger army was but only in the 2030s.

The promise on attack submarines is in the 2040s. Warfare is changing fast but Labour is moving too slowly. The Strategic Defence Review was promised for spring, delivered in summer, the same with the industrial strategy and that will be months away, confirmed in a written answer. The government must move faster to boost the capabilities of Armed Forces in the near term, not least by the opportunity to use autonomous systems and drone. The aim is to provide high quality drawn and anti-drone technology for Ukraine.

-- drone. We would then learn from that and parallel to build an industrial base for drones and this has been hampered by the procurement freeze in place since the election with Labour prioritising pennypinching over rapid rearmament and Ukraine is producing thousands of drones every month and Labour are just three for the British Armed Forces in the first month of government. We should go to 3% this Parliament, that is what we would do Abbie Wood also scrapped the crazy Chagos deal and rapidly rearmed, suspended Chagos money, not on tax cuts for those in Mauritius but on drones and anti-drone technology and technology that is battle-proven in Ukraine and can be ordered in months.

I do sufficient scale to enable the army to start training comprehensively in drone warfare by next year. That is the urgency we have to see against the threat that we face. To conclude, if the country Cheers the -- of the country hears this will be spent, 5% the defence, not Camilla, and that there were 337,000 regular personnel and over 6000 combat aircraft and a full 6000 combat aircraft and a full array of tactical nuclear weapons for land, sea, air.

Perhaps there was a difference between our 5% and Labour's today. Our Prime Minister actually led the country and Margaret Thatcher actually successfully defended the Falkland Islands relevant surrendering. She would not have been neutral when asked if he supported strikes on the nuclear program of a country like Iran and by standing shoulder to shoulder with Washington, she helped bring down the barrel and war. -- Berlin Wall. She -- we have a massive contact from Labour with unfunded ambitions, smoke and mirrors, which will not deter adversaries and our Armed Forces who greatly serve the nation deserve much better.
16:23
Maria Eagle Portrait Rt Hon Maria Eagle MP, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Liverpool Garston, Labour)
-
-
I would like to thank all of those who have spoken in the event today and I congratulate the right honourable gentleman for obtaining the debate and I think it is very proper in Armed Forces Week to highlight the issues he has done. To answer a few questions in the time I have, I have had an interesting read of his committee's report and we used to serve on the committee together many years ago and so I take the PAC report very seriously.

I would like to address some points that he raised. First of all, although it is true that there has been no plan for the last two years, during which both governments have been in power, because some of the disruption that there has been with the election, and then with the wholesale reordering of the way in which the MoD works, I recognise the fact that his committee is unsatisfied with the current state of affairs. I agree that it cannot stay how it is and ministers are committed to increasing transparency and I undertake to work closely with the committee to try and work out an arrangement going forward that they will be happy with because ministers are committed to increasing transparency and we are not looking to fail to report properly to Parliament or decrease transparency so I hope that reassures him.

We have only just received this report and I think we have a couple of months to reply to the recommendations properly and I will make sure we do so. I did recognise some of the figures that he was mentioning in his excellent speech. He asked the question, and I have one-to others, with varying -- and one or two others have asked the same question with similar levels of outrage - where is the money coming from? We have committed resources in this Parliament to get up to 2.5% in the core Defence budget, over £10.9 billion extra in real terms.

I don't think any of the Defence ministers have turned up at NATO with a fully set out plan to get to 5% by 2035. Each country has its own ways of Each country has its own ways of doing its budget back and the period in which it will do that and I think that it is quite reasonable for us to say that we hired a manifesto commitment during the election to reach 2.5% and when you have set out how you will do it and we have said how we will do it, how we will pay for it, and the honourable gentleman...

I have forgotten the name of your constituency, Solihull West, but he did say that he regretted the way in which it is being paid for and he made those points in his remarks but we have made that choice, difficult though it is, to make it clear where the money is coming from. We have made... We have all this met the commitment and parties on both sides of the House, when they were in government, they met the commitments and we have all this met our NATO dance and we will continue to do so.

The weight will be funded in the next Parliament will be set at the head of that parliament, head of the commencement of that parliament. -- The way that it will be set. We cannot set the path directly from this Parliament into the next Parliament but NATO will look at that. We do not budget for that length of time going ahead and neither did his party when it was in office. It is not how we do budgeting in Parliament and it is not how his government budgeted either.

NATO, I mean, the honourable gentleman has only just walked in. If he wants to heckle me, I am happy to have a discussion with him in the tearoom afterwards. There is no point in heckling me from a sedentary position when he has not taken part in the debate. We will set out... No. It is kind of the honourable gentleman to allow me to continue my speech. I am trying to answer the Chairman of the Select Committee, whose debate this is, and we know that NATO will, as it usually does, check each of the nations' spending against expectations on that basis and that would be an obvious way to see progress made towards that goal.

We will continue to report, as ever. I have no doubt that we will get to 3% in the next Parliament and there will be a trajectory to 5% overall with the 1.5% security and resilience spending. Instead of making allegations about it being smoke and mirrors, it would be better if the Opposition were just saying that they would do the same if they were in government and get a consensus to give certainty to a district that that is in fact what we are committed to doing as a nation.

I welcome the fact the Liberal Democrats said that they would commit themselves to that, from the opposition. And so, I look forward to engaging with the Chairman of the Select Committee in respect of his recommendations of the report and I intend to make sure they satisfied with what we come back with. He made some particular requests about Ajax and we all know that the Proteas name but he asked how come out when the 180 vehicles are delivered, the initial operating ability of Ajax will be by December 2025 and I'm hoping it might be sooner but that is the commitment and it is on track, as far as I am aware.

We will ensure it is delivered by that time. Morpheus and the Land, Environment, Tactical Communications Programme, it has Communications Programme, it has been troubled since the start but it is a 10-year program, £6.5 billion, lots of different things fitting together, as he will recall, and so we are trying to make sure it delivers what it is supposed to and some of these programs that we have inherited have troubled history. It is one of the reasons we are committed to Defence reform.

One of the problems with the procurement system, and it was mentioned in the debate and those who have experienced it in terms of professional lives and in the Moses and the Department, one of the issues has been that the system is not fit for purpose for doing things quickly and for delivering what it says it will deliver. One of the properties of the Defence Reform Agenda is not to reorder things for the sake of it, because that's not what we ought to be doing.

If the system were in perfect order, we would not reformat but one reason to have a direct, a National Armaments Director is accountable to ministers and the services for delivering the equipment they need in a timely fashion is because, currently, that is not what happens, currently, each service because of with their equipment budgets, top-level budgets, what they want, and do not talk across services and, as the honourable gentleman said, things get started because people think they want them and it is a 10-year program, not only to the end, and money is wasted.

We got to do better and one way to do that is clear accountability and that is important We can't just have precontract phases. We are not in times when we can get away with taking 10 years that is not quite what we wanted in the first place. There has been too much of that in the past. That is why we are segmenting our acquisition budget, that is why we will be in charge for delivering in the NAD, in much shorter timescales.

We are trying to get to contract within three months on that kind of capability. Standing up UK Defence innovation with a ring fenced budget of £400 million this year, 10% of our investor budget in future. We will aim to ensure that there is money behind making sure we can innovate faster, to get lethality into the hands of our war fighters faster. And even with nuclear submarines, we have to shorten the timescale it takes to get there. We have seen in the SDR, this aspiration to get the time to contract down from an average six years with those kinds of things down to two years.

That is a challenging aim but something we want to do. We have to make sure that with spiral upgrades with things like new radars we are putting into our existing capabilities, we get those timescales to contract. So we can have a much faster pace of innovation, of change, of improvement. The NAD is going to be responsible for that. There will be direct lines of accountability for there will be direct budget lines for which he can hold me accountable.

We just have to make sure that the culture change to empower those at a lower level happens so we don't just slip back into the old way of doing things. I know it is a challenge was not it is a challenge that we need to meet because of the times that we are in. He will ask about the helicopter.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the Mr must be a mind reader. On that point, will the Minister give us a timescale when Minister give us a timescale when the new helicopter will be awarded? Hopefully will be awarded to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Leonardo my constituency. I'm not making any announcements today Madam Deputy Speaker. I have today Madam Deputy Speaker. I have heard what he has said I want these matters dealt with more swiftly than matters dealt with more swiftly than they have been dealt with in the past. So he needs to listen out in past. So he needs to listen out in due course. But I've heard what he due course. But I've heard what he said. We need to make sure, reform we are doing will make a difference we are doing will make a difference to acquisition, to make a real improvement in our procurement.

To improvement in our procurement. To stop wasting money to get things into the hands of our war fighters first. We can argue about money, but first. We can argue about money, but I know in my job we have to do I know in my job we have to do better with the money that we get. Because the money that is being Because the money that is being allocated could be spent on other things. It could be spent on hospitals, could be spent on hospitals, could be spent on schools, it could be spent supporting people in their needs at home.

And yet we are spending it on defence. All except that we need to do that. We have to be able to show to the voters that the way in which we spend this money gets us the maximum value for it. I know that the right honourable gentleman's committee will help us to make sure we do that. I'm determined to make sure we do as a government and that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is what defence reformers. I will give way. It is brilliant that she is engaging in that debate. I said in engaging in that debate. I said in my speech about the 2.6% issue. This my speech about the 2.6% issue. This is very important because the pledge is 2.6% by 2027. In written answers, we are not being told what is the we are not being told what is the quantum of money that has been added into the MoD budget that is not currently there, i.e.

The intelligence spend and the foreign office items outside Chagos will stop can you tell us what that stop can you tell us what that quantity is so we can know if they really will be spending 2.5% of the core defence budget?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

core defence budget? The honourable gentleman and a simple pass at the beginning of his speech. I understand the point that speech. I understand the point that he makes. I have not seen the answers that he is referring to, so I would have to go away. I'm happy I would have to go away. I'm happy to discuss it with him on another occasion. I can't give him an answer

**** Possible New Speaker ****

today around what those figures are. Idyllically put a bit in my speech about recruitment and speech about recruitment and retention, and there will be a retention, and there will be a tension between the National Armaments Director and the chief of the defence staff, and the recruitment versus budget for recruitment versus budget for equipment. You can't suddenly turn on the tap and recruit more people, it takes time. Will the Minister today say anything about when she is going to start to really increase

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and ramp up recruitment? The Minister for Veterans and the Minister for the Armed Forces are leading a number of efforts to try leading a number of efforts to try and improve our recruitment and retention. As the House will know, with the flow and stop situation, it with the flow and stop situation, it takes time to turn out a long- standing trend. Unfortunately the previous government did not meet the recruitment target for the Armed recruitment target for the Armed Forces in any one of its 14 years.

It is like a supertanker. There needs to be turned around. We have needs to be turned around. We have already made reforms to try to speed up the time it takes a young person who wants to join the forces, the who wants to join the forces, the time it takes to get them in. That will start to show results in due will start to show results in due course. We are conscious of trying to do that. I'm conscious of the fact that I'm probably overusing my time so I don't really want to give time so I don't really want to give way any more.

I apologise. But there is another debate to come. I just is another debate to come. I just want to end by saying, we are all essentially in the same place in this house and understanding that the importance of boosting our defence spending in a way that is defence spending in a way that is effective, where we get good value for money, where we can boost our Armed Forces capacity to defend this nation, where we can ensure that we deter potential adversaries.

We are all on that same page in respect of that. That is a good place for me to finish my speech. I would like to thank all members for taking part. thank all members for taking part.
16:39
16:39
16:40
Ruth Cadbury Portrait Ruth Cadbury MP (Brentford and Isleworth, Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is as on the Order Paper. The debate will be opened by chair of the Transport Select Committee Ruth Cadbury. Committee Ruth Cadbury.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Whether we are walking, cycling, writing on buses, trams, trains or writing on buses, trams, trains or planes, transport plays a huge role in the daily lives of our constituents and to the businesses and public services on which we all and public services on which we all depend. I welcome that this government is investing properly in transport, to clearly in local transport, to clearly in local transport. I also welcome the Chancellor's announcement of £15.6 billion to connect our cities and billion to connect our cities and towns, as well as that fourfold increase in local transport grants increase in local transport grants by the end of this Parliament.

This government has ambition on transport. Way ahead of the last government. The Transport Select Committee is tasked to hold the departments to account on its departments to account on its program, both for the delivery and the use of resources, I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate formally because it is the formally because it is the opportunity to discuss the estimated departmental spend for the coming departmental spend for the coming financial year. And I know it is inevitable that members today will also want to consider wider issues of transport that affect unfair constituencies but I will try to limit my remarks to the estimates.

As our scrutiny role means seeking assurance that the departmental estimates link to that department's strategic objectives, this is so important. Following publication of the Supplementary Estimates for 2024/25, I wrote to the Department seeking clarity on how spending aligned with the strategic objective of the department. Transport Secretary replied saying officials would work with the House of Commons scrutiny unit and His Majesty's Treasury to consider any changes to the presentation of the estimate. I have not received more detail directly, and the main estimate memorandum provides no additional information explaining how spending is aligned with the strategic objectives of the Department, and this correspondence is available.

Furthermore, the departments memorandum was not received on time make it harder for my committee and others to undertake effective and timely scrutiny. The Department for Transport was one of only three departments along with the Cabinet Office and the Home Office whose memorandums were not provided alongside the publication of the Main Estimate. Then the Outcome Delivery Plans were DPs produced under the last government and listed the outcomes the department hopes to achieve through the spending alongside specific metrics by which progress could be measured.

The Department for Transport's most recent delivery plan was published in 2021. In that 2025/26 Main Estimates memorandum, the department said, " The DfT Outcome Delivery Plan for 2025 or/26 outlines ambition to build as modern efficient and sustainable transport network which raises living standards for communities. It details how resources are allocated between the priorities, growth, green and safer help transport and improving transport people. It later stays that the ODP includes a suite of core metrics to articulate progress against each priority outcome.

" The Outcome Delivery Plan for 2025/26 has not been published. The estimate memorandum does not expect house bending in the Estimates relate to commitments. The Cabinet Secretary recently promised the new set of ODPs with the public administration and constitutional affairs committee, something for ministerial approval. Therefore, without these, how can our committee, and therefore this House, reassured that its policy objectives are clear and it spending aligned with those objectives, and with the government very important and very welcome missions? I ask the Minister, and I will accept he may want to write to me.

Will the transport apartment follow the Cabinet Office plan to publish an Outcome Delivery Plan for 2025/26. I'm gonna move on to devolution and accountability. There have been increases in funding in the Main Estimates, £100 million allocated to the mayoral combined authorities and subsequently, at the spending review, to devolved institutions in England, with just over £15 billion for City Region Sustainable Transport Settlements and local transport.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving way. The previous government forced Transport for London to come forced Transport for London to come with a begging bowl to get the money needed to keep the tubes and buses needed to keep the tubes and buses going on capital. Dr Shi welcome this government multi-year funding this government multi-year funding deal for TfL? The largest settlement for over a decade, and she agreed for over a decade, and she agreed will bring stability to TfL's finances and the need to plan ahead?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

finances and the need to plan ahead? I welcome my honourable friend a neighbours intervention. As a neighbouring MP in London, I know neighbouring MP in London, I know that the stability in terms of the transport provision in London will transport provision in London will be of huge benefit to my constituents and Londoners and constituents and Londoners and constituents and Londoners and We did not get everything we wanted We did not get everything we wanted in the Spending Review, and Erik Kiss, the West London Orbital, but we got more than he got from the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

previous government. -- In our case. We are grateful for that. We have also seen the quadrupling of money for transport grants, meaning my constituency will receive almost £7 million of transport funding through the Spending Review. Two return to her previous point about strategy, does she agree it's important, as the government sets forward the road safety strategy later this year, that they listen to communities and local areas like Bracknell Forest in the development of the plan.

I plan to launch a consultation this summer and that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

she hoped that the government will listen? My honourable friend anticipates what I will cover in terms of road what I will cover in terms of road safety late on. The demolition of funding, listening to communities. funding, listening to communities. funding, listening to communities. -- The evolution. It means communities across the country will communities across the country will benefit through this overall national perspective on devolution national perspective on devolution and considering the country on the whole.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

whole. The Mayor in the East Midlands

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Mayor in the East Midlands has secured £2 billion for transport has secured £2 billion for transport to Nottingham so does my honourable friend agree that this government is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

friend agree that this government is taking strides to ensure the growth that comes through transport is being felt across the country? My honourable friend is right.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend is right. The changes the government is making will be felt across the country in will be felt across the country in all types of cities and regions as well. Going back to the specifics in terms of the £15 billion for the disabled transport settlement at the local transport grants, they are not ring fenced, which is good for local democracy but it does create challenges for the Department in terms of achieving national priorities and I've heard from one colleague who is concerned that the authority, that the politics of their authority is concerned with cars, and there is concern that where we want people to use public transport, active travel, but if local authorities use that funding for that, what can national government do with that?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She is giving an important speech and her passion for transport is and her passion for transport is clear to see. I welcome the additional funding for bus travel in additional funding for bus travel in Essex but I am aware of the issues with the local authorities. She with the local authorities. She agree it's not just about funding but accountability and making sure but accountability and making sure that the act in the best interests of residents and the money is spent efficiently, in the right way?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

efficiently, in the right way? I hope all local authorities do fully and properly and in an fully and properly and in an accessible way account for spending to residents.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to residents. I thank the honourable member for giving way and she talks about £100 giving way and she talks about £100 million available for combined Mayor authorities. She confident that is authorities. She confident that is new money rather than money reallocated from other parts that is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reallocated from other parts that is distributed? -- Pots. It is a mixture and the point is,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

It is a mixture and the point is, it is the philosophy of devolution that is important. It will allow them to deliver in ways that are different in each authority, according to the priorities and needs of different authorities. Many of the grants, there is a potential challenge in terms of achieving priorities and is also worth noting that the mean estimate for the Ministry of, Communities, Local Government, provides additional funding for West Midlands and there are other parts of money for other departments and that can be pooled together and used in the best way for each authority.

I want to ask the Minister, what happens if a devolved institution does diverge from departmental priorities? For example, acting not to fund active travel despite the objective to increase active travel? We will move on to a point of the spending review. The future introduction of place-based business cases has the potential to transform how government thinks about value and the benefits of transport interventions and outcomes and penned the business cases are from, we look forward to seeing a difference in how the government thinks about these connections.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I welcome her comments around the importance of place-based transport, importance of place-based transport, investment. Referring to her earlier comments, does she share my concerns comments, does she share my concerns that some of that investment is a little bit to open and concentrated in some areas and there may be areas in some areas and there may be areas outside those regions where more transformational investment that is place-based is warranted?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

place-based is warranted? Good point. One reason the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Good point. One reason the initial emphasis has been on mayoral authorities is because the expertise authorities is because the expertise and the transport, there is already work being done on transport work being done on transport strategies and, you know, there has strategies and, you know, there has already been... Work is being done and things are often further ahead. and things are often further ahead. Moving onto buses in a moment. In the inquiry into buses, which was the inquiry into buses, which was deliberately focusing on buses connecting communities away from connecting communities away from large urban areas, my honourable friend is right.

As local authorities have been stripped out over the last 15 years, much of that expertise among members and particularly among officers, it is not there and sort there are often not the people to do the strategic work and backup that will change. I hope when the Business Inquiry Report is published, that element will be included. I'm going on to specific transport modes, starting with buses. Evidence to the On buses connecting communities has emphasised the value of bus services and the need for measures to promote use, especially in rural and suburban areas.

It has stressed the importance...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Buses are so important to my community in Wales, such as the number 65 bus, supported by an number 65 bus, supported by an incredible community group, The Friends of the Number 65, and is incredibly important and with my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable friend agree with me must have more funding for buses across the UK? My honourable friend was in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My honourable friend was in the debate on the buses ill but there will be more opportunities to make these points because she makes the point very well, it is one thing to point very well, it is one thing to look at the structures but, for many look at the structures but, for many areas, unless funding is there, the buses are not there. She mentions buses are not there. She mentions the 65 and I have a battle with my local 65 bus but that is within the context of a regulated transport context of a regulated transport network, with transport for London.

network, with transport for London. We have a level of accountability, expectation, information about our policies which was stripped out in policies which was stripped out in the 1980s with the Thatcher government when the buses outside government when the buses outside London were deregulated. And so, yes, I... Ensuring that there are strategic objectives underlying the buses policy, both the funding and the Bosphorus approach, we welcome the retention of the cap of 3 pounds. -- The bus fares approach.

It gives an element of certainty that they did not have. I know the subsidy has been cut as the cap was raised from 2 pounds to 3 pounds. I want to discuss the funding and how this links with government objectives. What is the strategy, the government bus fare strategy pretty much are they looking for economic growth, particularly in towns where... One reason that many town centres are failing if people cannot get there to spend money.

Or is it economic growth or is it increased connectivity, or is the bus fare... Is policy being used to tackle the cost of living or increase the amount of riders are have shifted mobility? We are waiting for a sense of what the government is trying to achieve in terms of the strategy with bus fares. Moving onto goods, we are waiting for the list of road investment projects in the third road investment strategy. No scheme was published at the Spending Review.

The more recent UK infrastructure-your strategy sad, because A full list will be sent out as part of the development of the strategy." When will that list be published?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In my constituency, people are beyond frustrated by the congestion on the A27 and the byline was on the A27 and the byline was suggested that has been deferred for the period 2030-35, but without the period 2030-35, but without guaranteed funding. Does my honourable friend agree that honourable friend agree that strategic investment in key arterial roads is vital to unlocking economic roads is vital to unlocking economic growth and also easing the daily pressures on communities like me and across the country?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

across the country? I don't know that if you offered she speaks. I am well aware that she speaks. I am well aware that there are roads in the system... It there are roads in the system... It has to be carefully looked at and I learned many years ago as a planning student that sometimes increasing student that sometimes increasing road capacity, and I remember the road capacity, and I remember the widening of the M25 and I once had a boss who said that you can throw boss who said that you can throw seeds to pigeons and you get more pigeons coming to get the seats.

In pigeons coming to get the seats. In Trafalgar Square, you were able to feed seeds to pigeons but that was stopped but the concept that you have to do the right stuff in the right because otherwise you possibly make the problem worse. I take your point about the sense of frustration for her constituents in that situation. Touching on road safety. Given they are are serious casualty and fatality statistics in the UK, I am concerned that the funding for road safety research has been cut, despite the backdrop of the plans despite the backdrop of the plans for road safety and I know we are due to see the strategy forward safety towards the end of the year, so why has the funding for research been cut? Moving onto marathon, the Shipping Office for Reduced Shipping Office for Reduced Emissions, Otherwise Known As SHOTE, the funding is coming to an end this year and we are waiting for that and meanwhile be advanced manufacturing sector plan published this week said that there would be a further £30 million towards the development of clean maritime solutions through the clean maritime solutions through the UK shipping office from 2025-26.

Will the £30 million be sufficient Will the £30 million be sufficient for long-term plans for UK Shore, given we are lagging behind on maritime with competitive countries. On cycling, I welcome the increase in funding for active travel after the cut made by the previous government and this is an increase for the next year. However, these figures for growth appear inconsistent come up with the announcement at the Spending Review, for a 4-year figure, when, divided by four, looks like a reduction, so I wonder if the Minister could Rail reform will no doubt affect the size and shape of the Department spend on rail.

The Department's rights to prepare for savings and efficiencies as a result of removing duplication. While also delivering better rail service for passengers. My committee will pay close attention to the Department rail reform plans, not just for the new structures they establish of how effectively those new structures are able to achieve the government's aims. Does the Department have a costed achievable plan for reducing the cost base by £200 million as stated, and for growing passenger revenue that is shown in the estimate memorandum.

What level of subsidy would continue to be required? Madam Deputy Speaker, while I look forward to responses to my specific questions on the estimates, I would like to address a couple of other issues. Fines, fees, and charges are mentioned only once in the main estimates for transport is the increase in the charge for the existing Dartford Crossing was the National Audit Office has said in the report was published last week that the government is missing opportunities to deliver efficiencies and show the practice, and it is unlikely that current arrangements will deliver value for money for customers, businesses, and taxpayers.

Two examples. The DVLA spends £175 a year on the costs of licences but only £135 Cummins through fees. The fee for the driving test has been unchanged for years. Because it is so cheap, it is incentivising learner drivers to take their tests too early because it is cheaper to have another test them to have another lesson. Shouldn't they be empowered to respond to this? Is the government addressing its policy vacuum on finance fees and charges so we have a coherent strategy where each is set at a level that addresses a particular objective? It might be to incentivise, it might be to dis- incentivise, it might be to cover the costs or track API.

It is important to evaluate how this is spending given past challenges with managing large infrastructure managing large infrastructure projects particularly such as HS2. I welcome the reset of the HS2 and the committee is planning to hear from Mark Wild. Finally, I will repeat the points I made in this chamber about the need to develop more and more innovative forms of funding transport infrastructure. Land value capture, risksharing, PFIs, and more. Putting all this together we can ensure that all parts of the country can benefit in the future from badly needed transport infrastructure investment.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak in the Estimates Day debate on transport. The one thing I do agree with the honourable lady do agree with the honourable lady for Brentford and Isleworth is the importance of transport for importance of transport for importance of transport for communities. I diverged a little. If this government is serious about unlocking and delivering economic growth, particularly across the West growth, particularly across the West Midlands, they would be serious about funding transport.

The government's commitment to £10.2 government's commitment to £10.2 billion for rail enhancement is welcome. As ever it lacks detail and it leaves unanswered questions. If it leaves unanswered questions. If you take for example the Midlands Rail Hub, it was the last government
17:05
Wendy Morton Portrait Rt Hon Wendy Morton MP (Aldridge-Brownhills, Conservative)
-
-
Rail Hub, it was the last government who not only committed to the initial £123 million but also pledged money to deliver the hub in full under Network North. But today through the spending review, and through responses to my written questions, it is clear that it is not funded to delivery, but only to the next stage. I hope in summing up the Minister will clarify once and for all, is the new government committed to fully funding the delivery of this project, and where will it be completed? This is critical to the infrastructure of the West Midlands and beyond.

Staying on the topic of trains, I can't let this debate go without mentioning an old British train station. I would like to turn to the CRSTS which is covered in these estimates will stop it was thanks to the hard work of previous mayor Andy Street working with the then Conservative government that we securely set out a fully funded CRSTS program. This included £30 million to deliver change in my constituency. It was earmarked to receive funding for the delivery of the station by 2027.

Providing rail connectivity for the first time since the 1960s. Sadly it was the Transport Secretary's decision, together with the Chancellor who approved the Mayor Parker's decision to approve the capital funding to revenue. This money had been ring fenced for a station but has now been moved away from the train station and I suspect it has been moved to fund the Mayor's vanity bus project. The spending review of 2025 also confirmed £15.6 billion in funding to provide TCR settlements for nine mayoral authorities including £2.4 billion for the West Midlands.

The mayor could have chosen to get the station back on track but no, he has chosen to keep the station pushed into the sidings. This is despite the Chief Secretary to the Treasury indicating in this house on 4 June that the mayor did not spend all his money and was even encouraging colleagues to lobby him and how we might wish to spend the rest of that money. Suffice to say, the mayor of the West Midlands knows my views and he knows my ask.

And I will continue asking. Turning to bus services which are also key for connectivity but also for opportunity as well, in particular for communities such as mine would find themselves still without a train station. We have seen in the Estimates the national bus fare cap which was increased from £2.50 to 3 pounds is being extended to March 2027. This is fine but the Transport Secretary claims this is a measure to reduce the cost of everyday journeys for working people.

But for those of us in the West Midlands, it is another hit, another hit on what we have already seen from the mayor which is his hikes of more than 8% on fares of monthly and annual bus passes. In the debate on the Bus Services Bill earlier this month, I asked the Transport Secretary about how the so-called socially necessary services referenced in the bill would be protected and how they would be defined. She told me it is down to individual local authorities to define what is socially necessary but gave no assurances about how they would be supported to continue to provide these vital services.

As we saw, £750 million per year announced in the spending review is to maintain and improve bus services. It would be really helpful to understand what allocation will go to West Midlands from the spending review to these services.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my right honourable friend for giving way. She talks about the Bus Services Bill which is now in Bill Committee. Does she now in Bill Committee. Does she share my concern that the franchising arrangement of that bill have a little attraction to smaller local authorities like mine on the local authorities like mine on the Isle of Wight? If they were minded to go down the route of franchising, they would take all the risk could end up with a very large shortfall.

Certainly smaller authorities like

**** Possible New Speaker ****

mine could not swallow that. He makes an instant point when it comes to franchising. I think he is comes to franchising. I think he is right to highlight the potential impact on challenge for smaller authorities. I also think there are challenges for the bigger authorities. My constituency is part of the Walsall Borough, but I'm equally concerned about how this new model that our mayor is pushing forward with is going to be forward with is going to be sustainable. And I fear that in the future, my resident might find either a reduction in services, or an increase in cost.

If you are a an increase in cost. If you are a constituency on the edge of a large combined authority, there is the feeling that services are sucked into the centre and we are left out on the periphery. To conclude, Transport is vital to communities, vital for people and vital for access to employment. It is vital to access opportunities. But under this government's plans, it is quite clear that they have simply used reviews to move money around to their pet projects.

They are not driving up communities. It is simply another missed opportunity. And as long as my constituents continue to raise with me the question of Aldridge station, I can assure you I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will continue to raise it in this place. Thank you. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Let me begin by agreeing with my Let me begin by agreeing with my honourable friend, the chair of the Transport Select Committee. I think Transport Select Committee. I think it is absolutely right to welcome the huge ambition that has been the huge ambition that has been shown by this government with regards to transport, certainly much regards to transport, certainly much more ambition than what we have seen under previous governments. What I
17:11
Imran Hussain Portrait Imran Hussain MP (Bradford East, Labour)
-
-
under previous governments. What I would urge the government at the start of this debate is to grow boldly on that ambition. In particular for those areas that were left behind by the previous government. And allow that opportunity and growth to every corner of the UK. Let me begin also with regards to much of what I will say will be with regards to my own constituency, and the great city of Bradford. I'm sure. Let me begin by welcoming the recent announcement of the spending review of £2.1 billion for a new tramline and bus station in Bradford.

These projects represent an important step forward, and I am grateful Bradford is finally receiving the long overdue attention it deserves. Communities like mine and indeed yours Madam Deputy Speaker in Bradford have waited too long to see promises become progress. I have long campaigned for improved transport links in Bradford and across West Yorkshire alongside colleagues, campaigners, and Bradford City Council because I know how vital transport is to unlocking economic growth. It is a driver for regeneration, a bridge between communities, a pathway to opportunity.

If we are serious about regional growth, the government must go further. We need additional funding to ensure Bradford receives a full range of transport investment needs. Not only to support our local communities but to strengthen the economic performance of West Yorkshire and the wider North. Despite being one of the largest cities in the UK, Bradford has historically been left behind when it comes to national transport planning for the absence of strong rail connectivity continues to limit our potential.

That must change I believe Bradford would benefit significantly from a new modern and fit for purpose railway station, and whilst I welcome improvements, we must be far more ambitious if we want to deliver a station that truly connects Bradford to the rest of the country, and enables wider regeneration in our city centre. This is of course deliverable. A new rail station could be built at pace with a low risk of cost increases. I understand different government department are already looking at the business case for this, and this has been evidenced in terms of the piece and low risk of cost that this can be delivered at.

The benefits would be transformative. Improved connectivity between Leeds and Bradford would unlock a huge growth potential. I would also like to make the strong case for Bradford to be linked into the £11 billion TransPennine upgrade. I know there have already been consultations looking at the feasibility of this, and I'm sure I would certainly request that the Minister does address this in his closing remarks. Because, by linking Bradford to Huddersfield and the TransPennine line, we would have direct access to the wider region.

It would speed up journeys and help to put Radford on the map and be a huge boost for growth. I asked the Treasury to continue to work with the Department for Transport and regional partners to explore the improvements in East-West connectivity, compliment in the city's long-term growth strategy. If I may, if I can now turn to the huge benefits of the economic benefits not just for Bradford, not just to West Yorkshire Bradford, not just to West Yorkshire Regeneration and housing sites.

It is central to delivering the largest regeneration opportunity and could unlock up to 10,000 homes across the wider city centre. More investment in Bradford is not a cost but a long-term saving and means low welfare dependency, better access to jobs and learning and the more prosperous population. If Bradford could be the average for employment, we would unlock over £4.5 billion in additional annual economic input. The House would know that the 2024 a City of Culture programme is unlocking investment across West Yorkshire but to meet the growth objective of the government and level up opportunities, we need a fair and ambitious sector because without mobility, there is no capability.

I welcome what the government has done so far but I make the case for a new train station in Bradford, which I know the Minister and the departments are looking at very seriously. I asked the Minister that he does consider the strong case for real access to the TransPennine line. I urge the government to set out the additional funding and support that can be made available. Because, you and I know that a fully connected Bradford would lift the region and we will continue to campaign for the investment at Bradford so clearly deserves.
17:18
Steff Aquarone Portrait Steff Aquarone MP (North Norfolk, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I am grateful to the chair of the Select Committee and the Backbench Business Committee for the chance to speak to be. I was a little overwhelmed after the macro spending review. One of my constituents was not sure about what they were being offered. The bus fare cap is welcome but there is still an increase to what was previously in place. Other than that, what'll happen? Upgrades to the junction switch will support improved connections for passengers was overlooked once again and that belief to a higher cost when it is realised that they are necessary.

Active travel and questions of funding at a time when we should invest more to encourage the shift. invest more to encourage the shift. It will make an easier transaction. Also, I want to focus my remarks today on the company serving on the bill committee where we have learned the money applied a motion to be built which means it can only incur expenditure under existing acts and not create anything from its own which would require any money. Also, it feels like we are in a political it feels like we are in a political sitcom and the Treasury, in this instance, have effectively shut the Department for Transport and asked them to come up with something popular and free.

It's only a matter of time until we get a ministerial assistant on the train. We cannot improve this with at the Minister to support it and there have been laudable efforts made. He believes in buses and there is a lot of good stuff in the number two bill but distributing the powers without funding for the use of them and no guidance on best practice will not deliver the improvements we need. The Centre of Excellence is staffed by a grand total of three people and the day-to-day spending cut will not allow us to see a hiring spree soon and there is help across departments and it helps with the benefits bill by widening access to employment and training opportunities and it's better for the planet, reducing car journeys, emissions from.

Revolutionising public transport would be a victory and I hope the Treasury will finally give it the funding that it needs. Thank you.
17:21
Catherine Fookes Portrait Catherine Fookes MP (Monmouthshire, Labour)
-
-
My constituency is a rural county and I'm delighted to speak to talk about transport. It enables people to get to work, school, hospital appointments, anywhere else. It also enables me to get up here and I've talked about my favourite bus service, the number 65, and it is incredibly important for allowing, for example, young people to get to work you cannot drive yet. I am delighted with the expenditure outlined in the Comprehensive Spending Review for improving transport links across South Wales and across the border and it has the potential to be a game changer for my constituents.

I like a regular and reliable public transport is holding the country back and I think it is fitting and restricted for residence but more importantly it's a major barrier to economic growth which is the main mission of the government. This is where residents were over the moon because £445 million was committed to Welsh rail in the spending review and the funding is available for the stations running between my constituency, across the cadre. It was out late in the Burns Review and it includes an important station to it includes an important station to me.

Hundreds of new homes have been built they are there and the commuters who live and then do not have a viable option to get to work. And so, on the major congestion is around there, particularly the nearby M4, and this transformative funding will see huge benefits to my community and allow huge numbers of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

commute. Like my honourable friend, I also

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Like my honourable friend, I also depend on rail services from London depend on rail services from London to South Wales. I want to underline the benefits of point. In my experience, we have benefited hugely experience, we have benefited hugely in Redding from rebuilding the in Redding from rebuilding the station and that is linked to new homes. The station. Does she agree homes. The station. Does she agree with me that this brings forward real benefits to many constituents across the country and there are across the country and there are examples where Labour councils and government are working together.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

government are working together. I agree it is great to see two Labour governments working together here, Westminster, and in Cardiff, to deliver better transport links in to deliver better transport links in London, Reading, down to South London, Reading, down to South Wales. It's important to have this as soon as possible. This station is innovative and people can walk to the surrounding area. It is the surrounding area. It is innovative, green, and affordable choice to kickstart the important new set of transport links.

We had to start somewhere with these five stations and I'm using this debate to suggest that the ministers involved in transport support the journey with the stations. Another key issue is the closure of the bridge to heavy goods vehicles and this is impacting businesses around Chepstow and particularly on the New House industrial estate. They are being forced to add miles to journeys. The safety of bridges is important but the closure of the M 48 bridge is bad for businesses, the environment, everyone driving locally as they face more congestion.

The situation is sadly expected to continue until 2026 but I'm delighted the Minister has confirmed she is encouraging National Highways to expedite the process as soon as possible but I must stress the current timescales will hit hard and support for local businesses, many in the logistics sector, and help for the highways to move faster, it would be extremely welcome. We need the bridge fixing and we need the station. These are big issues and it would prove the benefit of working together to improve connectivity, saute congestion, reduce emissions, and supercharge economic growth.

I wholeheartedly welcome the funding outlined in the Spending Review to help us take steps towards this.
17:26
Olly Glover Portrait Olly Glover MP (Didcot and Wantage, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I start by thanking the honourable member for her wide- ranging opening speech to this important debate and I thank the backbench business committee for backbench business committee for making time for it. There is much to well, particularly with relation to capital investment. It is important to hold the course and be consistent and support for such schemes and for example, proposals for the tram have been in and out so many times that people living in the region have understandably lost count and so I hope that it will happen this time.

And with the positive headlines, And with the positive headlines, hidden in the footnotes is a 5% cut to operational spending during the period and looking at the detail, there are optimistic assumptions which form the basis of how that will be born. In section 1.7 of the memorandum for the mean estimate, 2025-26, it is clear the assumption on how that will be made is through recovery of passenger revenues is recovery of passenger revenues is the pandemic and plant efficiencies and it states that if revenue growth is lower implementation of reformist law that is a pity, it could result in spending adjustments.

And while there is the potential to improve things, I think concerned with except that it will not solve all of its problems on its own. Given the its problems on its own. Given the transport system is not going anywhere, we will not see closures of railways or large cuts. I think it is time to collectively stop viewing it as a burden and we must spend intelligently to make the most of the assets at the costs that come with them. By spending more or approaching thing more radically, we can make more of what goes into the transport system.

It's important to recognise that at the moment there seems to be suggesting that funding for the existing network may be constrained by the expensive disaster and the implementation of HS2. We need high-speed rail in the country but the costs are unbelievable and I suggest that it would be as wrong to punish the network for the failings as it would be due to private roads of investment because of a motorway investment because of a motorway project. How would the gap potentially be affected? In terms of taking the railways to the next level, some things could be done that cost very little, if anything.

I find the ticket checks on the train by staff are inconsistent and large should be present on the train and ensuring we are maximising revenue gathering from ticket sales. Fully integrating the more busy routes will lead to exhilaration and more butter, making the most of what we have, and it's not just me who thinks a rolling program of ratification would reduce costs. It was recently stated that it is incontrovertible that it would do so. As an example...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does he agree that electrification of railway lines boosts capacity on those lines and boosts capacity on those lines and enables them to ship more freight

**** Possible New Speaker ****

across our great nation? Is correct in what he says and having worked on this in my past life, the modelling of exhilaration shows it is transformative compared shows it is transformative compared to diesel and allows us to make the most of the limited capacity we most of the limited capacity we have. An example of how electrification to save costs from electrification to save costs from my constituency, the electrification would reduce the complexity and cost by reducing long periods of the trains sitting idle because of the trains sitting idle because of the split between London and did cut which is electrified.

It is to serve which is electrified. It is to serve housing and the major site. And housing and the major site. And there is a project based on new or heavily upgraded will be because little, given is not in service but would massively increase the potential. It would reduce the need for costly upgrades of roads like for costly upgrades of roads like the A34, which has heavy freight traffic in terms of container haulage heading to the Midlands and it is capacity constraints on the railway between Southampton and railway between Southampton and Last night it was my pleasure to attend a meeting who are campaigning for improvements to be made at their station.

News stations on existing lines, such as an area of housing population in my constituency, would make more of the infrastructure. I would like to ask the government if they are planning to think radical or if we are going to be stuck in a rut doing more of the same? As an example, thinking of international rail, government support for depot capacity at Temple Mills is all that is needed to get more people using international rail services, the private sector will do the rest, that will have the potential to fill out slots at Heathrow airport.

I called the government for sustained and generous funding for active travels so they can continue the strong work to ensure local authorities don't just put them that go nowhere but the highest quality and structure to get us cycling. Innovation would make it clear where the cheapest fares are to be had. And, as we found out, on a recent visit to the Port of Dover, there is potential for Dover to Calais. The French ports already ready for the charge of battery ships but we are told Dover needs major supply upgrades and no plans are in place for that, we are potentially missing an opportunity to achieve a global

**** Possible New Speaker ****

first. I give way. He is giving a very detailed and passionate speech about the passionate speech about the possibilities of transport investment across the country, does he recognise the value of electrification on the Cornish electrification on the Cornish mainline, not just the fact that it would be in the region of a cost benefit but, as he pointed out, the benefit but, as he pointed out, the adjacent grid upgrade potential that it brings.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

it brings. I thank the honourable gentleman for his intervention, I would agree, full electrification is the best solution, we can use battery trains on the branch line is one that has been done, I would welcome a longer conversation, I understand the current thinking is not the right solution across Devon and Cornwall, given that the roads have a dual given that the roads have a dual carriageway. Integrated transport is carriageway. Integrated transport is key to growing confidence and use of key to growing confidence and use of public transport, proving those interfaces between routes.

The forthcoming trust strategy is welcome but it must address these integrated timetables. Baffling and expensive fare structures and lack of routes. By pursuing integrated, this is how Switzerland achieved the highest rate of public transport utilisation in Europe. The key question for our system, so critical to our economy and environment is, do we want to see more of the same or create a transport system that enables access to jobs, social mobility and economic change? Current plans do not suggest a real

**** Possible New Speaker ****

change of course. Thank you, I would like to thank

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, I would like to thank speakers who have taken part in this debate already, particularly the debate already, particularly the chair of the transport Select Committee, a very compact speech, transport is a huge priority for residents in Dartford with a constituency containing the only current Thames crossing east of current Thames crossing east of London, as well as a shop in High Speed 1 and we have a number of other key railway stations and bus services that need major investment, services that need major investment, I think it is fair to say, I could provide examples of where government
17:35
17:35
17:35
Jim Dickson Portrait Jim Dickson MP (Dartford, Labour)
-
-
my appreciation for the announcement at the Spending Review that the Department for Transport will create Department for Transport will create a £1 billion fund to repair some of the run-down transport infrastructure, roads, bridges and infrastructure, roads, bridges and like that this government inherited, for which there is no other available funding to address and nowhere will this be more welcome than in my constituency where the than in my constituency where the collapse of a road more than two years ago left residents unable to years ago left residents unable to use a main road and blighted by HGVs using roads that are far too small, using roads that are far too small, I would like to particularly put on record my thanks to the Minister for roads forfeiting very soon after her appointment following last year's election and I look forward to more information in the coming months on how the county council and others how the county council and others across the country can apply for that structured funding.

I also welcome the development consent order, funding and vital work on proposed new Lower Thames crossing which, when finally built, will receive traffic overspill, relieve traffic overspill, which often brings Dartford to a halt. I know that residents are anticipating further news on the funding package that we saw, 690 billion -- £690 million announced, they want to see further funding, private sector and public sector. I look forward to working with ministers to make that happen, the jobs, training and new business opportunities, the construction and operation of the crossing will help to drive economic growth across the whole Thames estuary and beyond, into the wider region.

Money for potholes, including the £54 million for Kent this year, is incredibly welcome news, after our roads have become a visible sign of decline under the party opposite and I know that residents will be looking to the new county council to make a real improvement to our roads with that money. Let S see it properly spent.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The other thing the community... The honourable member is placing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The honourable member is placing his faith in his new, reformed, county council, is that really the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

case? Can I thank the honourable gentleman for that intervention, gentleman for that intervention, having seen the doge unit turn up at having seen the doge unit turn up at Kent on day one, I am not hugely confident they will spend it well, but let's give them the chance, I but let's give them the chance, I threw that challenge to an iPhone challenge to them because our challenge to them because our community needs to see the council put the 23 million worth of funding put the 23 million worth of funding that government has provided, along with the new franchise power that with the new franchise power that are becoming available, we need to see them put that to good use, to see them put that to good use, to improve bus services in Dartford and across Kent, and we will be holding across Kent, and we will be holding them to account on this.

I want to say a quick word about developments in rail, I would be happy to give way$$JOIN...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We are chuffed about the record TransPennine root, would he back my calls for better Wi-Fi so that our constituents can check their emails with speed and my son can stream poor patrol.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He makes an extremely good point, Wi-Fi not only enables people to Wi-Fi not only enables people to work on the train and maintain connectivity that they need to live connectivity that they need to live their lives, whilst using public transport, but it also provides huge transport, but it also provides huge opportunities for entertainment, I know there are many fans out there who will be encouraged by improved who will be encouraged by improved Wi-Fi. The other development is in Wi-Fi.

The other development is in Dartford, we still want to see further improvements to the further improvements to the reliability of services provided by the south-east and Thameslink lines, the south-east and Thameslink lines, I'm encouraged that on Southeastern, we see an early example of we see an early example of integrated management between track and train operations of the kind and train operations of the kind that will become the norm under Great British Railways going forward and we are pioneering that in the south-east part of the Network Rail.

If we can only see more stations If we can only see more stations with step free access, where it is badly needed, that would be badly needed, that would be incredibly welcome and, for High Speed Rail, I also note, as was mentioned by the honourable member, the welcome development that we see new entrants to the international rail services routes, they are signalling their intent to stop at one or both of M St and Ashford in Kent, restoring international services to our county, we will welcome support from ministers for this new international rail connectivity, finally, what Dartford residents want to see, coming down the line, are extra things, the successful Elizabeth line, crossrail, as it was originally known, rather than terminating at Abbey Wood, we want to see it reach ebbs fleet and beyond, I appreciate there is not currently funding on the table, but I hope, given the size of the growing community, that over the course of this parliament, we might be able to look at how an extension of the Elizabeth line extension of the Elizabeth line might be funded.

I know that residents in my constituency will welcome these assessments and the action that the government is taking to improve transport infrastructure and connectivity and, as I have said before, I look forward to continuing to work with ministers to get Dartford moving.
17:42
Al Pinkerton Portrait Dr Al Pinkerton MP (Surrey Heath, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I rise today to thank the government for the emphasis they have placed on transporting critical infrastructure in their agenda so far, to urge them to go further and dangled the exciting prospects offered by my constituency of Surrey Heath, the unlogged economic potential that they have and to draw attention to some of the unmet needs of my constituents in a Surrey Heath, as they stand today, Surrey Heath is often seen as a well connected and prosperous part of the country but that perception has allowed a troubling complacency to take root, beneath that impression lies a set of worsening challenges that limit opportunity, stifle growth and put a strain on residents across the towns and villages of my constituency.

We are the second most car -dependent constituency in the country, with 1.64 cars per household, above the average, that is not the result of convenience or affluence but necessity. Public transport is patchy, unreliable and poorly integrated and, in some areas, absent altogether, that car dependency comes at a huge financial cost to my constituents and paces a pressure on the road and structure, junction three of the M3 is frequently overwhelmed and is a daily staple of the morning and evening traffic reports, any listener to radio two will know the village of Lightwater by its association with congestion and long delays which is terribly unfair because it is a lovely place.

The A3 tutu, our arterial route connecting several villages, is frequently at a standstill, frustrated drivers bailout, turning residential roads into rapids, it is now regularly grinding to a halt. This isn't only about congestion, it is about safety and livability of the communities, residents along this route frequent noise and dangerous driving, there have been serious accidents. Calls for basic safety measures such a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

speed enforcement remain unanswered. He mentions safety measures, in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

He mentions safety measures, in my constituency, on the 827 come we have a roundabout which many of my have a roundabout which many of my constituents avoid like the plague and I actually was caught on that same roundabout the other week with same roundabout the other week with same roundabout the other week with a staff member in my car, we had very near miss. Does my honourable friend agree, the concept of, we will deal with the problem once the will deal with the problem once the accident has happened is the wrong way to plan for protections on these way to plan for protections on these roads and we need to fix the problems before those deaths occur.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

problems before those deaths occur. My honourable friend will not be surprised to hear that I agree with her entirely, we have had several her entirely, we have had several fatalities and often are local, county council, makes the same kind of claim, we can't do anything, we of claim, we can't do anything, we won't do anything until there is greater evidence of safety need, the ultimate expression for which is ultimate expression for which is tragically often a fatality. Bus services in my constituency are services in my constituency are sparse and non-existent in some areas, there is no regular bus areas, there is no regular bus service in one area tool and when they do run, they are poorly timed with train connections, causing residents to miss links.

And that disproportionately affect the elderly, young people, who have not learned to drive haven't been able to access driving test appointments because of the crisis, in that part of our civic life, but also lower income households, 2025, the simple act of travelling to work, attending work, school or hospital should not be dependent on car ownership or be dependent on car ownership or They now collide with rapid development. The commitment to build homes, Surrey is expected to deliver hundred and 13% increase in housing over the coming years.

74% of my constituents are already constrained by greenbelt or other planning restrictions. The village of deep part, alone, for example, a former army base, that has become notorious in the public imagination has already delivered and will continue to deliver over the next couple of Thousands of vehicles on roads already under pressure, because there is no public transport that has been put in, alongside the increases. Meanwhile RL infrastructure has not only failed to keep up with the times, it is actually gone backwards.

Camberley our largest town and home to the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst is just 28 miles from central London. Yet journeys regularly exceed 75 minutes, induration. With only three direct trains per day, Nana lined with standard. It now takes longer to travel to London from Camberley, in 2025, then it did in 1925. Commuters are often forced to jump into their cars, travel to Woking, Brookwood or Farnborough, adding to road congestion and hindering any meaningful relief towards the realisation of sustainable transport aspirations.

We need a long-term strategic approach to infrastructure. That means a faster more direct train links, dependable and interlinked bus routes and delivery ahead of an after major housing developments. That's why I am calling on the government to commission a national survey on local activity in order to build an accurate picture of travel times in between our communities and regional economic centres. We must identify the areas most underserved and ensure this investment is guided by evidence and lived experience. Not just assumptions of affluence and connectivity.

Such a national review would enable a more coherent strategy, I believe to emerge. In an era where every pal matters, I think all of us recognise, every single pound matters right now. That kind of connectivity matters mapping will provide a critical guide for decisions, decisions that must unlock that potential and areas that have been left behind and without anticipating the results of such a survey I have every belief, every inkling that communities are like mine in Surrey Heath would emerge and show themselves to be right with that kind of economic investment.

There are serious about building sustainable, connecting communities and making every pound investment count, we must begin by listening, identifying those gaps and acting to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

close them. Alex made.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Alex made. Back bench business committee for allowing this debate. I very much welcome the investment in transport, especially public transport, in the spending review. I think the spending review. I think the commitment is really clear. £2.3 million for the Local Transport Grant, supporting local transport improvements like bus loans. 616 improvements like bus loans. 616 million to build walking and cycling infrastructure and 2.6 billion to
17:50
Alex Mayer Portrait Alex Mayer MP (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard, Labour)
-
-
infrastructure and 2.6 billion to decarbonise the transport. This is all very, very important. Investment in public transport, particularly buses has multiple benefits, reducing congestion, sorry... Yes. I will give way. Our bus routes cut by 60% under successive Conservative governments. Thus my honourable friend agree that buses have a huge impact upon people's lives. Their ability to access opportunities in training, at work, to be able to get to health appointments. To be able to connect with family, friends and would my honourable friend agree that this Labour government is focused on enabling better bus travel is the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

right route. I thank my noble friend for that intervention. I absolutely agree intervention. I absolutely agree with her. I absolutely welcome with her. I absolutely welcome buses, absolutely. I think the buses, absolutely. I think the company for better transport say it brings something like a £4.55 a benefits to 1 pound. Absolutely, up benefits to 1 pound. Absolutely, up for that. On the subject of better for that. On the subject of better buses, I think that when you have got good public transport like got good public transport like busways, in my constituency people come to them and that is why I bring back the campaign to try to extend the Dunstable busway, towards the Dunstable busway, towards Leighton Buzzard and ideally on to Leighton Buzzard and ideally on to Bletchley.

The transport select Bletchley. The transport select committee, in her opening remarks talked about fees. It was one of the issues that we come in the Select Committee have been talking about. Particularly in relation to driving test. I wonder whether the Minister test. I wonder whether the Minister might consider looking at that issue of fees, as a way to change behaviour. I have been contacted by constituents who have been told they have to wait until nine months to get a driving test slot, which is absolutely ridiculous.

People are putting their lives on hold for things like that. One of the issues we found when we gathered evidence, in the Select Committee is that people are booking up test, regardless of whether they are ready to take a test or not. Because, as the honourable member said it is actually cheaper sometimes to book that driving test time, then it is to book a couple of lessons. And that cannot be right. I do not think there is any government out there that would relish putting up the price of the driving test.

The honourable member was challenging us to find policies that were both popular and free. I do think that we might perhaps be able to think about this a little bit differently. For example, how about we do put up the fee, but we give everybody one free go at it. Basically if you pass your driving test, you get a refund. So that would encourage everybody to only go for it when they really thought they were going to pass it.

I think we could probably make it cost neutral and it would free up stocks, because as I said only those people who are wanting, who thought they were definitely ready could offset it by putting up the charges for everyone. Probably would not have done me any good. I failed my driving test about five times. I eventually managed it. Moving onto local roads. Local roads make up 98% of the road network and carry 60% of all the traffic. Because every journey, however it starts, by foot, by bike, by bus, by car.

It starts and ends on a local road. Local roads are managed by highway agency authorities. Highways authorities are not always transport authorities. This is going to become an increasing issue as the government goes on the devolution agenda, which I welcome and a more SDA's are established, whether transport authorities will stop if we are looking at buses for example, either with enhanced partnership, the agreement between LCA bus operator and franchising carried out the transport authority, there isn't the highways authority, there are things that it is very difficult for the transport authority to do, to keep us running on time.

Keeping a bus running on time is quite dependent upon the roads at that it is running on. As we all know roads can be blocked by roadworks, they can be in a poor state of repair. The bus line can be obstructed. Stand-alone transport authority does not have control over the planning system, they do not own the bus stops. They do not get any cash from bus enforcement. None of that comes their way. But they are the authorities that are expected to deliver the funding.

Like for example the £15.6 billion CCR settlement. I asked the Minister what lessons have been learnt from CSER S in terms of delivery? Especially any blockages that have been encountered because of the space between transport and highways. And indeed the lack of highways. And indeed the lack of passenger transport executives. I talk to other Ministers about, I'm delighted to see this Minister in his place. Everything about passenger transport executives, I would be interesting to hear. I really would argue that it could be a much more cost efficient system.

Just as we are bringing track and train together, rightly, as a government, I really do think we also need to have a conversation about bringing bus and bus lane together to. together to. Thank you. When we talk about
17:56
Noah Law Portrait Noah Law MP (St Austell and Newquay, Labour)
-
-
national rail, about building a country. The must be visible in country. The must be visible in places like Cornwall. I rise to speak today, not just as the member speak today, not just as the member 's and also a? New key. When it comes to transport new infrastructure it has been overlooked. Wave after wave of overlooked. Wave after wave of capital funding, despite its strategic academic potential has to fight for anything more than a basic fight for anything more than a basic improvements.

The mid Cornwall was improvements. The mid Cornwall was built as a flagship project for regeneration. This, we face the real possibility of reduced services, possibility of reduced services, delays in driver training and a fractured promise to towns like Newquay, that rely on connectivity to survive and thrive. That is in to survive and thrive. That is in fairness, that is failing. We must move beyond piecemeal incremental improvements. A real mid Cornwall improvements. A real mid Cornwall Metro would lead us in store and new key and whizz about shovel ready as you can get with a major project of you can get with a major project of that scale, in Cornwall.

It is backed by rigorous analysis and albeit outdated feasibility study. It has a cost benefit ratio of 2.3. It would connect our critical minerals industry to global opportunity. It would help young people access to jobs and training and it would breathe life into some of the most underinvested communities, across the whole Southwest. We know there are still announcements to come. Cornwall cannot sit at the back of the queue any longer. Over the period covered by the spending review, the south- west received 201 million, in a Local Transport Grant fund.

I believe that is something around quadruple, which is very, very welcome. After that, just 24.4 million was allocated to Cornwall. And the West of England Combined Authority, in the same period, despite a similar population to that of Cornwall received £752 million. We should welcome the same progress and investment in this particular area of transport as we have seen in so many other areas, like funding for local government and in health given today's announcement of the Cahill formula.

What we need is a Department for transport that works with this, in Cornwall, around us. We need a proper devolved authority over our local rail system, to optimise transport integration, to solve communities like Vauxhall, Jo Visco and Saint-Denis, where our track turns to track bed. We need investment that reflects our economic and industrial ambition and we need decisions based on public goods, not on postcodes. The Green Book review opposing a place -based approaches to investment sets our government a clear challenge.

Cornwall is ready to step up to that challenge. Much of the shadow of what we see in our infrastructure was cast in the last industrial revolution. With the right investment in Cornwall, we can lead

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the next. I did not realise if the honourable gentleman had finished.
17:59
Paul Kohler Portrait Mr Paul Kohler MP (Wimbledon, Liberal Democrat)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable gentleman had finished. Thank you Sir Roger. As we all know, strong connectivity is a vital know, strong connectivity is a vital economic growth. And prosperity. It is key to boosting productivity, attracting regional investment and raising living standards. 2nd to this is making public transport more available, affordable, accessible. The transport crisis in this country is clear. Since 2015, local bus journeys have dropped by over a billion. 1/4 of all trips. Many routes cut and fares up since 2013.

Below pandemic levels, rail subsidies have surged over £22 billion. 65% higher than before the pandemic. Despite repeated above inflation fare increases. So what is the plank? Yes it offers us some hope, but the picture is mixed. Let me begin with a positive aspect of these estimates. The 4.4% rise in capital spending is welcome. Especially the boost for transport for London, HS2, showing recognition for capital needs. The continued support for the rail and the trans- Pennine route upgrade is also welcome.

They are vital for connecting communities, and driving growth. Exactly the kind of growth. Exactly the kind of The The new The new settlement The new settlement is The new settlement is good The new settlement is good news The new settlement is good news but it short of what is needed. Support for devolution is also encouraging but believe this is best placed to deliver for their areas and increase autonomy for regions is positive, even if not all the money is new.

However, areas outside Combined Authority's must not be overlooked. Turning to the negatives. Our most concerning is the £150 million cut to DTD spending. Impacting subsidies for trains and buses. These reductions threaten the already fragile services. Raising serious doubts on the ability to achieve the priorities. There is a clear mismatch between the government's ambitious goals and the budget priorities. An £81 billion rise in Administration, largely to cover high in National Insurance Contribution's, introduced by the government, raises questions about whether resources are being prioritised rather than directly supporting frontline transport improvements.

Despite pledges to address climate change, the budget address climate change, the budget lacks detail. Moving the DfT open to allegations without a clear operational pathway. Effectively green washing. Whilst £50 million in cost, the HS2 program, further ethics issues with long-term planning. Not only does expenditure represent some costs, low return investment, it also casts doubt on the ability to deliver major instruction projects, vital for national connectivity and economic growth. The Liberal Democrats proposed simplifying ticketing, including accessibility, and connect ability and increasing usage and income.

We also advocate a 10 year electrification plan, investing in a zero carbon by ensuring all new lines are electrified. Buses, the most popular transport, gained little support from these estimates that the franchising reforms are welcome, they won't perform regular service without funding and expertise. We need more than just three people in the centre of excellence. Years of neglect have destroyed much of the national bus network, I say to communities holding back growth. Clearly, the Hike should be reversed.

It is causing real hardship to some of the poorest in society. These estimates reveal continued cuts to our subsidies, precisely the wrong approach for communities who need reliable, affordable bus services. The Liberal Democrats believe active travel industry must accompany public transport reform, the government approach is disappointing, although £246 million is quite the allocated to Active Travel England, funding is set to be cut by over 90 million next year, undermining the earlier promises of unprecedented investment.

The Liberal Democrats propose a different power, a nation wide activity build new walking networks, better integrated with existing transport, this cost-effective, eco-friendly approach connect homes, schools, High Street and transport hubs. Sir Roger, what these estimates show is a department and government that lacks ambition. Spending investment for the future is positive, cutting day-to-day spending is a poor decision for a government that says economic growth is its highest priority. The transport system that works but not just for the decade, for the next bus, next train, next school run and hospital visit.

This means of funding services properly, local authorities and... Giving local authorities and putting passengers at the heart of every decision, something Liberal Democrats continue to fight. to fight.
18:06
Gareth Bacon Portrait Gareth Bacon MP (Orpington, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you, it is a pleasure to respond on behalf of His Majesty's opposition and I would like to thank the honourable lady for securing this important debate. Transport has always been about more than how we get from a to B. Infrastructure is the connective tissue of our economy and investment in instruction can propel economic growth, I think the whole House agrees with that. In that light, I welcome the spending review furthers capital investment, HS2 spending increases and in real- time annual growth of 3.5%.

The government have outlined where much of the capital will be directed in the spending review and the 10 year plan and I'm pleased many of these products align with the previous government. I look forward to the publication of the pipeline in July to see further information. I do understand there will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

occasions... On the Network North plan, does my honourable friend agree, whilst some budget have been transferred over, the train station was one that over, the train station was one that was part of that, it was funded and does he share with me, my disappointment for my committee, it disappointment for my committee, it has been scrapped by the West

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Midlands. My right honourable friend is a champion for constituents and I share her disappointment, it is not share her disappointment, it is not the first time I heard that raised, the first time I heard that raised, I suspect it won't be the last. I do understand, there might be occasions where members opposite might fail to where members opposite might fail to read the previous announcements. The last government promised sums to authorities which have been closely authorities which have been closely replicated, in some cases identically, by those promised in this government's spending review announcement.

For example, for West Yorkshire, 2.115 billion was Yorkshire, 2.115 billion was promised in 2023, 2.15 billion in 2025. Greater Manchester, 2.47 2025. Greater Manchester, 2.47 billion in 2023, 2.47 in 2025, billion in 2023, 2.47 in 2025, Liverpool city region, 1.58 billion in 2023 and 1.58 billion in 2025. West Midlands, 2.56 billion, 2.4 billion in 2025, I could go on, but I believe members can recognise the point. The estimates are not new and they are not innovative. Turning to the substance of the plans, I want to take this opportunity to examine the assumptions underpinning this Review, assumptions that are flawed.

The first relates to the supposed benefit of nationalisation, the Spending Review anticipate the Department for Transport date to date revenue spending will fall by five% in real terms bring the next three years. Whilst I do not dispute it is possible to make savings within the department, I do question the means by which the government expects to deliver them. The Spending Review claims that, and I quote, resourced funding falls in real terms over the period primarily driven by declining subsidy, as passenger ridership and revenue continues to have a post Covid-19 and efficiencies and savings army through public ownership.

This is another entry, in the ever-growing list of benefits that Labour claims nationalisation will deliver, lower fares, no strings, no spending. Let us be clear, this is political daydreaming, not economic reality. The first train operating company to be brought into public ownership by the government was South Western Railways and we have already seen unexpected costs. With credit reports showing that mistakes made by the government will cost the taxpayer an anticipated £250 million more. The Transport Secretary himself admitted that nationalisation is not a silver bullet, she is right, but the narrative prevented in the ending review continues to rely on assumptions that remain unproven.

Labour's plan to nationalise even the best performing rail operators will benefit neither passengers and taxpayers. Beyond the loss of private sector investment, nationalisation poses a deep, structural risk. There will be enormous pressure to harmonise terms and conditions across the entire workforce, that might sound harmless, it might even sound desirable, in practice, it means the trade unions openly calling for levelling-up paid benefits and working practices to the most generous standard found in the system, they have wasted no time in doing this, I am sure their members will be delighted by this, for the government, the taxpayer and the fare payer, this has one outcome, rising costs, most certainly, with no corresponding rises in productivity.

This sets the stage for spiralling costs, renewed industrial action and poorer services for passengers. I will turn to the wider economic picture. The government claims them stretch plans are creating the conditions for sustainable economic growth throughout the UK. The truth is, the greatest barrier to growth is not the lack of spending, how could it be when current levels are just about the highest in our entire history. No, the greatest area to growth is the economic mismanagement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

We know that to fund the spending, Labour have not got control. They simply change the fiscal rules to allow billions more in the borrowing. More borrowing is not the long-term answer, this is not free money, Britain already spends almost £106 billion per year just to service its debt, these payments outweigh what we spend to protect our country from crime at home, our debt servicing payments and exceed -- payments exceed the spending for the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Justice and Home Office put together.

It is irresponsible. Higher spending and borrowing fuels inflation, undermines growth and blows a hole in public finances. Of course, we all know how Labour plans to fill the hole, with higher taxes. Will the Transport Secretary urged the Chancellor to restore discipline? I hope that she does. Will she set a credible strategy to deliver efficiencies? I hope that she does. Come autumn, we are not hit with another round of tax hikes. Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank members for their contributions to this debate, exploring priorities for government spending, including those members who presented in vision with which I might disagree.

You must acknowledge the government continues to offer more questions than solutions, in a transport, we are presented with legislation to change bus policy without the funding that we know will be required to permit it public. We have pipeline plans, real reform papers, investment strategies, when I was appointed Shadow's active state, I was faced by the former Secretary who declared she wanted to move fast and fix things. Nearly one year into this government, it feels as though things are moving at the speed of a canal boat in reverse.

Very slowly and taking the country backwards. The problem is not the current Transport Secretary, nor is it the Minister sitting opposite me today. The problem emanates from numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street. When the captain and first officers of the ship had no ideas of their own, when they refused to scan the horizon and see it for what it is, the journey ends up lost and directionless. For the good of the country, I hope the government will come to understand that real change means supporting British business and backing the everyday commuter.

In the meantime, I feel that these estimates are indicative of a government that is not listening, failing to heed the warnings and will continue to steer the ship straight towards the iceberg.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Sir Roger, and you can't speak for much, can I see what can't speak for much, can I see what a champion UART for the airport in
18:15
Mike Kane Portrait Mike Kane MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport) (Wythenshawe and Sale East, Labour)
-
-
your constituency. I want to thank my honourable friend and my honourable friend, for securing the debate, for the work that they have done on the transport Select Committee and I am grateful for all members's contributions. I will try to address as many as I can because there are an awful lot of questions. I know that members are anxious for views on specific schemes but I will not be able to announce new decisions today, we will make an announcement in due course through the usual processes.

I would like to start by addressing the comments of the Select Committee chair, regarding how spending is linked to regarding how spending is linked to Our spelling is wholly directed to this ambition and Plan for Change. At the heart of our approach is transport to drive growth, better transport will connect people and opportunities and ensure businesses can grow and thrive. That is why we are investing in vital public transport services, repairing our road network, transforming our railways and providing unprecedented investment to local leaders to invest in their priority.

The first 10 bills were transport. We didn't have a five built in the last 14 have a five built in the last 14 In the 25/26 year alone. In the 25/26 year alone. You In the 25/26 year alone. You are delivering a 1.6 billion for local road maintenance. 1.3 billion for local transport, in our big city regions and over 1 billion for bus services, in this financial year. We're also providing over £420 million for our smaller cities, towns and rural areas, which has been raised today in the chamber.

Our investments will help drive growth in every part of the country, raise living standards of everyone we are supporting the transition to net zero and an economy powered by clean energy, in over £200 million to accelerate the rollout of electric vehicle charge points, this year. We are investing in active travel, infrastructure to improve the health of the nation, with an additional £150 million worth of investments in cycling, walking, infrastructure, in this financial year, alone. We are supporting a bus services and capping affairs to connect people to jobs and to boost opportunity and we are supporting safer streets by making public transport safer, including most importantly for women and girls.

Work we are making sure that every penny of taxpayers money is put to good use. From greater efficiency within the department to get them to grips with spiralling costs of HS2 and bringing back that project, back on track. While this provides That only two weeks ago the Chancellor set out how our ambitions for the transport sector will last the whole of this Parliament. With the settlement we have received the 2026 onward we were delivering increased transport, privatising funding in the Midlands and the North and giving areas more control North and giving areas more control over how this money is spent.

We will improve every day journeys across this country and we will invest in the Critical National Infrastructure needed to connect our cities and our towns, in the long term enabling economic growth. Transport is part of delivering the Transport is part of delivering the Of national renewal. My honourable friend, I thank her for her speech as the chair of the transport Select Committee. She asked me a number of questions about when we will publish the outcome and delivery plan. This will be done by all departments, coordinated through the Cabinet office, in the future.

Later this year. Sorry. She asked about subsidiarity, what if mayors don't spend the money and the powers we've given to them on the things that we want to do. In the interview she cited active travel as an example. I think even with subsidiarity, they have to deliver against government outcomes on objectives. We hope to work with them in the spirit of cooperation to make sure that that is done right for some she had a specific question around the buses.

What was it meant to achieve, our bus reform and are billion pound investment. We introduced the new 3 pounds fair Single Bus Fares in England, outside London, Which Has Had the Cap for a Long Time. This Will Ensure Millions of People Can Afford Affordable Fares and Better Opportunities to Go to Both College and Work and See Friends and Family. With UK, We Have Moved Fast with the Decarbonisation Plan and the Research and Development Funding for Research and Development Funding for This Will Continue.

We Have Worked with the IMO, the National Maritime Organisation to Reduce Greenhouse Gas and the, across Our Planet. And in Terms of Road Safety We Have Announced £185 Million for Safer Roads, Funds for the 99 Most Risky a Roads, to Invest in Them. And We Have Made clear Commitments about Rail and Cost Base and Subsidy Going Forward. The Member for Audrey Jo and Brownhill, a Former Rail Minister Is Undoubtedly a Champion of the Station. Well Done with That.

When It Was Reallocated by the Current Mayor to Cover the Costs of the Schemes, Implemented the Old Mayor, but Do Not Have the Funding. She also taught about the buses as well. I have already mentioned that a £1 billion we have invested, to come into better buses, in this country. The Member for Bradford East, who can't be in this seat, at the moment is an astonishing champion for Bradford. Can I pay tribute to him and Susan Hinchcliff,, the 2.1 million train line and bus station investment was transformative.

The £45 million in government money money an services, government money money an services, to London. We will be making announcements in the subsequent weeks, the next few weeks around that, with powerhouse rail. How important it is to connect both the cities of Leeds, Bradford, Manchester, Liverpool, going forward.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yes, I just want to be absolutely clear. While we are still talking about Rail services. The money was about Rail services. The money was allocated, it was ring fenced, it was his government, Sir Roger, for deciding to move the money from deciding to move the money from capital to revenue. To blame it is simply unfair. It is not the case.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thought the former mayor actually was quite a talented actually was quite a talented individual. And succeeded by another talented individual who has had to make tough choices around fundings make tough choices around fundings that were committed and were never implemented under the last government policy after promise government policy after promise after promise with no delivery whatsoever. She should carry on campaigning. The Member for North campaigning. The Member for North Norfolk, talked about buses, rightly, again.

I have already mentioned the amount of funding were putting in there. The £616 million putting in there. The £616 million to active travel. A number of members have mentioned, on top of the £300 million was allocated. Last the £300 million was allocated. Last year. Just to say to the member of North Norfolk. I had a right great time with my wife cycling rebellion way in his constituency last Easter, which is a wonderful piece of infrastructure. I'm happy to give way on the rebelling way.

I'm happy to give way. Coming to North Norfolk. He is welcome any times that having experienced first hand in my constituency. Would he agree that we need to look at alternative models for rural transport in the future?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think giving that control to local authorities, as difficult as it is in some circumstances that it is in some circumstances that have been measured today. The have been measured today. The billion pound commitment. People in rural economies need to get, just as much as people in cities and we are committed to making sure that happens. The Member for happens. The Member for Monmouthshire, cannot wait to visit Monmouthshire, cannot wait to visit on the 65 bus, and talking about two Labour governments working hand-in- Labour governments working hand-in- hand around a real investment, into the station as well.

I am glad she the station as well. I am glad she has that correspondence with 48 and has that correspondence with 48 and its safety there. The Member for its safety there. The Member for Didcot and Wantage talked about HS to, rightly. And highlighted the to, rightly. And highlighted the need, sort of, the need to connect maritime industries on the south coast, to the rail network. Taking a maximum advantage of both maritime maximum advantage of both maritime and rail to get that stock off our roads.

The Member for Dartford, something about Galley Hill Road had collapsed and basically that was a metaphor I thought for transport under the last government. We have committed to the lower Thames crossing and initial investment. I think that the £590 million. We will be making announcements, in due course. We have also put £54 million into potholes in Kent. So, this government committing to the lower Thames crossing, with announcements to come, fixing the roads and not one full member in this debate, here today.

Let's remind the people of Kent, day in, day out about their commitment, or lack of commitment we are doing to improve the lives of the people of Kent. The member of Surrey Heath. I was with his previous predecessor last night, and the Scottish members, Scottish members are to Surrey Heath, particularly? Some other mannerisms were the same. He made some very important contributions, about evidence-based systems, in terms of transport. Demonstrating that. isn't a sort of cultural woke, looking at data to drive our country up.

-- This isn't a sort of cultural, woke. I remember our manifesto commitments about connectivity, for transport across the country. That will be coming as well. I hope he gets involved in that debate when we bring it forward to Parliament. The Member for Didcot and Wantage, talked about HS two and we have accepted James Stewart's recommendations, about the cost overruns there. He was right to highlight them and also, write to highlight our railways and maritime industry working together. Green shipping corridors is going to be key to our future shipping and our grid capacity and household communities is not up to scratch, he knows that, we know that, that's what we have made manifesto commitments around our grid capacity.

I note we have already made announcements about greater train connectivity. I do understand the point he makes about depot constraints and the government is looking at that, as well. The Member for St Austell and Newquay is a real champion for Cornwall. I'm glad we could announce in 25/26, 4.1 million for Cornwall alone, in addition to 201 billion that he mentioned, that is a four times greater than the last settlement. We hope to see things improve, in that wonderful place in the country.

The Member for Wimbledon. I'm always astonished. He is like a latter-day Blair Hurlock, in his pinstripe and polkadots. He was so positive about the government. I thought it was going to cross the floor for one second. We will give him time. I just want to say what he was disappointed on. We have done more to decarbonise, we have done more to decarbonise both the buses and any government has done for a generation and we have done more for active travel in one year than any government has done for a generation.

I'm happy to give way, always to the honourable member. I thank the Minister for his compliments and forgiving way. Does , less money next year. Is there a sensible way to move forward?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Active travel under this government is a settlements that go forward. Under the last government. I have to say the Prime Minister the Member for Uxbridge, I thought was Member for Uxbridge, I thought was actually a very good, in this space. The announcements he made were then all pared back and what local authorities can't do is have a long-term continuing investment to connect to these roots, to get people walking, and cycling. My people walking, and cycling. My constituents, diabetes type II, hypertension CIPD, all things that hypertension CIPD, all things that can be fixed by more of us walking and cycling.

It is key to this government, not just the transport government, not just the transport mission but it's health mission and mission but it's health mission and as well. I come to the vulnerable member opposite. I thank him for his member opposite. I thank him for his contribution. I would say about the settlements being greater in West Manchester and the West Midlands. Manchester and the West Midlands. They aren't actually that this government is delivering on those settlements. We had a semi- policies under the last administration.

We under the last administration. We are gonna deliver and we are delivering. I will take no lessons about the cost of Great British about the cost of Great British about the cost of Great British Rail. I think this nation is proud of, when we were left with the debacle of clearing up the overrun course of HS2. That was cut to Yorkshire, it was cut by the Prime Minister and... Tory party conference, in Manchester was cut while he was there.

A most astonishing decision and the most astonishing place to do it. I have to say as a proud trade union member, I'm proud of the trade unions that have now this past year got around the table. Years of industrial strife. We are solving the dispute, particularly in the railway industry and services are He voted for a budget under the Prime Minister which left us with a £22 billion black hole that we have been tackling, as well as setting out our ambition for the future.

Sir Roger, we are fixing the foundation of the transport system to deliver the priorities, our funding settlement for 25/26 enables us to press ahead with reforming the bus and rail services, getting to grips with the maintenance backlog, empowering local leaders to deliver, building new route for the country. The settlements announced earlier this month will build upon this to drive progress towards the government missions and improve transport for businesses and people across this country. Therefore, I would like to thank members for contributing to the debate today, I am grateful for the important work of the Transport Committee and I look forward to working with it and I commend these estimates to the House.
18:32
18:33
18:33
Ruth Cadbury Portrait Ruth Cadbury MP (Brentford and Isleworth, Labour)
-
-
Committee for awarding this opportunity this afternoon, I would also like to thank all of the members who contributed to the members who contributed to the debate today. I was thinking, in terms of what people have said, some of the themes, the most common of the themes, the most common specific issue that was mentioned by specific issue that was mentioned by members across the country was no need for a new station or new stations in their constituencies and all gave really coherent and all gave really coherent and rational reasons about why do stations needed to be opened.

I grew stations needed to be opened. I grew up in Edgbaston, South Birmingham, along the line, we did not have a along the line, we did not have a five way station, a university station, now they$$JOIN... Were station, now they$$JOIN... Were installed about 30 years ago, they were not there when I grew up, it is unbelievable to think they weren't there because the use that they have there because the use that they have is just incredible. It is a really fast service into new Street, as I fast service into new Street, as I know the on remember probably knows, although it is the other side of greater Birmingham.

I also want to mention, not just a new station but a new Metro that the Member for Newquay mentioned and made a very powerful case for the need for the community. It really quite deprived community in many places, we must remember there are places that are left out and need new lines, whether it is light rail awful rail. The Member for Aldridge and Brownhills made an important point about the need for decision-makers to remember need for decision-makers to remember those outer areas and they are as important as the core areas of our cities.

And the Member for Bradford East, as well as making a passionate plea for a new station, thanked the government, a really good example of what this government is achieving, the tramline and the bus station, he said, shows how long that community has been fighting for that service. Very different part of the UK, North Norfolk, my honourable friend on the Transport Committee made a strong case about issues facing rural constituencies, finding transport solutions is not easy. And along with the Member for Surrey Heath, mentioned in different ways, the downsize of high car dependency in a very rural area, literally no other way to get about, at all.

Unless 1 Can Dr a car, often decimating the population. Rural villages and hamlets and so on. In the London hinterland, implications of high car dependency on congestion and I do not drive outside of London that often, I don't drive in London that often, but I can recognise those issues. He also raises the important point about the inadequate alternatives to car travel that are built into new deferments, I know that the planning policies under this government are seeking to address that gap in policy, because otherwise we're just lauding car dependency.

The Member for Monmouthshire made an important point about the implications to local economies and people when a major piece of structure is close, I really hope the bridge is opened before too long, the honourable member, another member of the committee, made many expert points about rail, if anybody needs to... Has any questions about rail, ask the honourable member. He was, I think, the only member here today, I think, who mentioned freight, but also, along with the Member for Dartford, the importance of accessibility and people who do pick up the transport committee's first report, the previous punk, on access, the experiences of people with disabilities.

The Member for Dartford raised a point that, actually, we get again and again, potholes, why our second enquiry is on street works and the damage that potholes cause to vehicles, but also, the disruption caused by the poor practice utilities repair them and do not do it properly and repairs are left standing for a long time. The Member for Dartford also mentioned the importance of the Elizabeth line extension, despite the criticisms over the years, of the cost and delays of crossrail, we can now look at the massive success the Elizabeth line has brought, we know it is not only...

It is having so many huge benefits in terms of growth, enabling new developments, it is taking pressure off lines like, in my case, the Heathrow branch of the Piccadilly line, but those benefits show why extending the mindset that, or bringing in new ones$$JOIN... The Elizabeth line, being in London and the south-east, as an example about why it doesn't necessarily need checks from the Treasury to fund projects like that, that is a really good sample of how land value capture could fund these projects.

And the Member for Dunstable... Talked about the value Dunstable... Talked about the value of buses and having a bus fare policy, she also made an innovative suggestion around charging for driving tests, which I thought should be noted by the Minister, when they go back, I do hope they look at these and there is a new suggestion. And, to the Front Benchers, member for Wimbledon, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, there was nothing wrong in any of the individual projects he mentioned in themselves, but, as so often happens, with the Liberal Democrat ideas, as a program, it is financially unachievable.

The Labour Party is in power, already delivering strategies and specific change, but it is doing so within the financial constraints which this government inherited. The opposition Secretary omitted to mention his Secretary omitted to mention his government's lack of coherent policies, the government ministers policies, he omitted to mention the funding for local schemes was generally decided more on the basis of the marginality of the member seats than the rationality of the proposals.

He also failed to mention that cutting and then stopping H cost billions and billions of pounds. Finally, I come to my honourable friend, the Minister for honourable friend, the Minister for transport, he reminded us of the importance for transport contribution and also reminded us that you cannot make unfunded

**** Possible New Speaker ****

promises, thank you. The question necessary to dispose

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question necessary to dispose of the motion stand over until 7 o'clock, understanding over 54. o'clock, understanding over 54.
18:42
None Portrait Sitting suspended until 7PM
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, Order, order.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Order, order. I Order, order. I am Order, order. I am required Order, order. I am required to put the questions necessary to put the questions necessary to disclose the proceedings. Relating to expenditure, which has already to expenditure, which has already been moved, As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. The question is the motion on the The question is the motion on the Order Paper. Which has already been moved.

As many are of that opinion moved. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The question is the motion on the Order Paper relating to expenditure by the Ministry of Housing, communities and local government, which has already been moved. As many are of that opinion moved. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. The question "No". The Ayes have it. The question is the motion on the Order Paper.

Relating to expenditure the Ministry of Justice, which has already been of Justice, which has already been moved. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. The question is the motion on the Order Paper relating to expenditure by the Ministry of Defence, which has already been moved, As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. The question is the motion on the Order Paper dating to expenditure by the Department for Transport, which has already been moved.

As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. Estimates motion on the Main Estimates Act 2526, Minister to move formally. The question is as on the Order Paper, As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. Bill ordered to be brought in on the motions relating to estimates 25/26, he will prepare and bring in the Bill?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Chancellor fixed, Darren

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Supply Supply and Supply and appropriation Supply and appropriation Main Estimates Act number two bill. Estimates Act number two bill. Tomorrow. We now come to motion before, competition. The question is before, competition. The question is as on the Order Paper. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". Division deferred until Wednesday. Motion deferred until Wednesday. Motion number five, local government. The question is on the Order Paper.

As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. Motion number six, have it. Motion number six, companies, the question is as on the Order Paper. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it. Question number seven, nuclear energy, the question is as on the Order Paper. As many are of that opinion say, "Aye", and of the contrary, "No". The Ayes have it.
19:04
None Portrait Adjournment: Haemochromatosis screening
-

The question is that this House do now adjourn.
19:04
Torcuil Crichton Portrait Adjournment: Haemochromatosis screening Torcuil Crichton MP (Na h-Eileanan an Iar, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, I beg to move the House debate the need for screening for human ptosis, and I ought to begin with an explanation of this very long word, it put simply is too much iron in the blood, and, to save time, I shall refer to it as HCT in this debate, it is an inherited genetic condition, a disorder often known as the Celtic is because it is particularly prevalent in Celtic bloodlines.

Although I think it is probably a old genetic response to times of famine that we carry into modern times. Untreated, it can lead to several common conditions which we might describe as Scottish diseases of ill-health, they are cirrhosis of the liver, heart disease, arthritis and so on. Once spotted, it is easily treated with vivisection, which means bloodletting, about 450 millilitres is taken out of the patient to chase down the levels in the body to normal levels.

Generally, it is asymptomatic and, without a test to measure levels, it can be easily missed, I have a bit of knowledge of the bloodletting side of the business, because for the last 17 years, I have been in the Royal London Hospital, on a regular basis, for vivisection, I am grateful to the staff there, what incredible treatment they have given me, and I'm grateful to my younger brother, Donald, who was tested and found he carried the gene in 2008.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Can I thank the honourable gentleman, he is right to bring this forward, he and I spoke last night about the prevalence it has, he is about the prevalence it has, he is right, it is called the Celtic curse, some would say maybe I am a curse, some would say maybe I am a curse and some people... I'm sure number the would go to that number the would go to that conclusion, but one in 10 have this disorder, Northern Irish, Scots, disorder, Northern Irish, Scots, Welsh, even the Cornish community.

Welsh, even the Cornish community. However, even with this, the screening does not naturally take place in the quality of life is impacted four years before somebody goes to their GP, does the onward judgement agree that this is a judgement agree that this is a necessary period of time to live with something that could easily be treated.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

treated. Thank you. I thank him for his intervention, always a blessing, intervention, always a blessing, never occurs. I have some information that will be of interest to his part of the world later in my to his part of the world later in my speech. So, I have declared my own speech. So, I have declared my own interest, in that I have it, but it is not just my own experience, but that of my constituents, the make-up of my constituency inspired me to do this debate, it is not all about me.

There is a groundbreaking DNA study, headed by a professor at Edinburgh University, which discovered that in the Western Isles, there is a hotspot for this genetic mutation which the body, at some stage, adopted for survival. You are at risk of developing this condition if both of your parents have a faulty gene and you inherit one copy from each of them. You will not get it if only one of your parents has it, or carries the gene, and you only get one copy, but there is a chance you could passage onto your own children.

If you do inherit two copies, both your parents are carriers, you will not necessarily get it, about half of the people with two copies of this gene developed the condition, it is not known why this is. What is known is that the Viking genes DNA study took DNA samples from islanders in Orkney, Shetland, and the Western Isles and threw up some amazing discoveries. Of course, people wanted to find out if they had Viking heritage, many said in swapped sandals, feel that the question has come for the scientists to crunch the numbers, I did not do so myself, feeling Viking by name and nature, I did not think it was necessary, but analysis of the data and cross analysis showed that in Orkney and Shetland, there were rare and unique cancer genes which led to participants being alerted of the condition, and so the studies there actually saved lives.

The good news for the Western Isles is that no cancer genes were found but, whilst the results are finalised, it is clear that it is a hotspot and for an inherited level of high cholesterol. Now, according to the professor, the numbers in the Western Isles are sufficiently high to justify a population wide screening. For instance, one in 212 people in the south and east of Finland carry two copies, versus one

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in 62 people. I thank my honourable friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable friend for giving way, my constituent, the rain, asked me to attend the debate rain, asked me to attend the debate this evening and I sit on the APPG, this evening and I sit on the APPG, she suffers with it and she has found a way to manage her disease by found a way to manage her disease by donating blood on a regular basis, but she is pleased that, through genetic testing, she was able to genetic testing, she was able to genetic testing, she was able to know about that before she suffered severe organ damage, which can happen to many people with this disease, does he agree with me, emetic testing for those people who are more likely to be diagnosed with are more likely to be diagnosed with this condition, is really essential if we are going to help people to live healthy lives without the need

**** Possible New Speaker ****

live healthy lives without the need for medical intervention. Thank you, I do indeed agree

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, I do indeed agree that, whilst widespread, it was not widely known about until recently. widely known about until recently. And gene testing, will let many more And gene testing, will let many more people know and early intervention is vital in order to stop people delivering other illnesses which might be missed as being. It is not just her constituency that is affected, in Northern Ireland, or the north of Ireland, however you view the map, the situation is more stark.

Among the Ulster Scots population, there is A1 in 23 current of the two faulty genes, similar to mainland Scotland. In the Catholic community, the North West of Ireland, there is the highest concentration in all of the British Isles, one in 54 Kerry two faulty copies. From the professor's work, we can predict one in 94 men in the Western Isles will deliver -- develop HCT, one in 18 of North West Irish ancestry in our constituencies in Scotland, one in 80 people from that area could have this condition, perhaps undetected, perhaps misdiagnosed, perhaps suffering from the long list of illnesses.

As I said, in Orkney and Shetland, analysis of the Viking gene study uncovered rare cancers and lives were saved. People who have been discovered to have the gene have been alerted by letter, but the figures on the Western Isles do not include people who did not take part in the study, it is a timely warning for screening of a blood condition... A practice that is not expensive. In the act on this spike, the professor has recommended Ireland wide screening for this.

But I would like to go further, I think everyone in the Western Isles should be screened but, I think should be also offered DNA tests across the board to show what other conditions they might have.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just quickly, my name is Shannon,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Just quickly, my name is Shannon, descended from Scotland, I am probably your cousin, when it comes to the screening, it needs to be done in Northern Ireland as well. I would not disagree, a screening would be revolutionary, it would save money in the short-term and save money in the short-term and long-term and it would save lives, long-term and it would save lives, two decades ahead of the rest of the world in terms of medicine, it would be transformative, it would be radical, but only as radical as plans in the UK or Chino sequencing within a decade, a plant backed by within a decade, a plant backed by the health sector, this will put us on the front foot of preventative on the front foot of preventative medicine.

And, of course, that would cost money, 650 million is earmarked cost money, 650 million is earmarked by the health Department, but a by the health Department, but a small and modified pilot is at hand with the samples of high levels of
19:19
11:00
None Portrait Oral questions: Science, Innovation and Technology
-

19:30
11:00
None Portrait Oral questions: Science, Innovation and Technology
-

19:30
11:01
19:54
11:29
None Portrait Oral questions: Science, Innovation and Technology
-

19:59
11:30
None Portrait Oral questions: Science, Innovation and Technology
-

20:00
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page