Maritime and Coastguard Agency

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Wednesday 8th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for bringing forward this urgent question. My constituents in South Queensferry, where we have a lifeboat, have written to me in great numbers to say that they are concerned about the coastguard service. The service in South Queensferry is unlike many of the others that have been mentioned. It is not rural or in the highlands; it is largely suburban. It patrols an area under three very large bridges, and the CROs have to deal with a lot of tragic incidents. The coastguards there have told me that they are concerned about what might happen as a result of the changes. Will the Minister come to my constituency to hear what they and the community have to say as we hit peak tourist season?

[Keir Mather]

I am very happy to engage with the hon. Lady’s constituents on this matter, and I thank her for so robustly defending them in this House. She is right to say that we have spoken a lot about the importance of CROs to rural, island and coastal communities. She brings an incredibly important perspective on the implications for cities, especially as we look towards the summer period and peak tourist season. She is right to point to the fact that this will build as an issue over the summer. When the changes were originally announced, they were due to be implemented in September, but that is not to say that I am not cognisant of the fact that there could be implications if people feel demotivated and unwilling to attend a call-out before then. It is really important that we take the time to re-engage with CROs, such as those in her constituency, and to talk about the long-term options.

Coastguard Volunteers: Remuneration and HMRC Guidance

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Westminster Hall

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for securing this debate and introducing it so very well.

In Burnham-on-Sea, we have a fantastic coastguard team and rescue officers. They are dedicated volunteers who respond to incidents along one of the most challenging stretches of coastline in the country. The Bristol channel has one of the highest tidal ranges in the world, and the risks are very real. When people get into difficulty, it is these volunteers who respond, often within minutes. Following the recent court ruling and changes to policy, many of those volunteers now face losing the limited financial compensation that they receive in return for their valuable efforts. I have spoken to members of the Burnham-on-Sea coastguard team, who are deeply concerned about what that means for their future involvement.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

The hon. Member talks about the responsibilities. Does he agree with what the coastguard in South Queensferry, in my area, has said—that at the stroke of a pen, the MCA has dispensed with all responsibilities to the CROs and put them in a vulnerable position?

[Sir Ashley Fox]

I agree with the hon. Lady: I think those volunteers have been poorly treated.

The payments were never a salary, but they made it possible for people to continue volunteering. One officer of many years, who shared his thoughts with me, said:

“Call Outs never come at a ‘convenient’ time. The money we earn would never replace the time lost, but it does soften the blow.”

It is often said that rescue officers do not volunteer for financial reward but out of a strong sense of duty and community spirit. However, the modest compensation recognised the very real costs involved: travel, time away from work and the disruption to family life.

I understand that the MCA must operate within the law, and that the Court of Appeal ruling has created a complex situation. It is, though, sad to see these committed volunteers penalised as they have been. I urge the Government to look at what they can do to continue supporting our volunteer coastguards and would be grateful if the Minister addressed these questions when he sums up. What assessment has been made of the impact on recruitment and retention? In constituencies such as mine, a reduction in volunteer numbers would have a direct impact on public safety. Is the Minister satisfied with the MCA’s engagement with volunteer coastguard teams? I end by thanking the coastguard volunteers in Burnham-on-Sea and across the country.

Ports and Port Connectivity

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jayne Kirkham]

There is a real issue of clunkiness in the co-ordination between different Departments to speed up the progress of getting these ports into use. That is one example of how we could work together so much better to ensure that Port Talbot is up to full speed as quickly as possible, which it really needs to be.

The grant funding that is being deployed to support the offshore wind sector, such as the Crown Estate and the GBE supply chain accelerator funding, is focused on future users of infrastructure such as manufacturers and supply chains rather than ports. At present, the main dedicated support available to ports comes from the offshore wind growth fund, which is privately operated. That leaves a gap in public funding for the critical infrastructure needed to unlock projects. My port of Falmouth has very ambitious development plans to service—and potentially assemble—floating offshore wind, as well as on defence, commercial ship repair and cruises. It is a truly mixed port and a “no regrets” investment, but at a cost of about £120 million. It will be a struggle to fund that huge investment from shareholders alone.

There is also the issue of how ports are owned. Some, like Falmouth, are privately owned, while some, like Falmouth harbour commissioners, are trustee-owned. Others, like Gorran Haven in my constituency, are charitable trusts, which often fall through the cracks of available funding. There is an argument—I am a Co-operative MP—that, as vital community assets, ports should be publicly or co-operatively owned, which I would like the Minister to consider.

How do we get money into ports? What should we do? First, a joined-up approach across Government Departments is necessary. The Minister here today is from the Department for Transport, but ports sit between multiple Departments, including the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, the Department for Business and Trade, the Ministry of Defence and, of course, the Treasury, where the money will come from. It sometimes feels difficult to know who to go to, and ports fall through the cracks.

Secondly, targeted funding for port infrastructure to support clean energy industries is essential. That would help to reduce up-front risk, improve return on investment and leverage private capital. For example, in the Celtic sea, Port Talbot has benefited from funding, and a new wind port will unlock an initial 4.5 GW of floating offshore wind.

The Government’s investment in Port Talbot is also bolstered by Celtic freeport’s newly released five-year plan, which sets out how Milford Haven and Port Talbot will be used to attract major investment to the region. The freeport will deploy its money and work with all those public financial institutions to bridge the capital gap, but investment in other ports in the region is needed to make the deployment of FLOW feasible.

A multi-port strategy in the Celtic sea would allow activity to be distributed across several specialised ports, minimising bottlenecks and providing flexibility. Different ports bring very different strengths—Falmouth and Plymouth are very different from Appledore and its shipbuilding—so a single port approach for FLOW in the Celtic sea just would not work. There is also regional disparity. Projects in the North sea have seen significantly more investment than those in the Celtic sea with investment from GB Energy, for example, and the North sea already has established supply chain and port capabilities.

Thirdly, we must address the question of revenue certainty. Ports require firm commitments from developers before they can justify and secure the capital for the infrastructure upgrades that, for example, floating offshore wind demands, yet developers cannot make those commitments without the revenue certainty that a contract for difference provides. It feels like the two sides are both waiting to see who moves first, like a game of chicken.

Compounding that is a fundamental timeline mismatch. Port upgrades take a long time—five years or more—whereas the lead time for a CfD process is much shorter. That results in a structural gap that leaves ports unable to be ready when projects need them, even when the commercial will exists on both sides.

Breaking that deadlock requires direct Government intervention in the form of revenue support or underwriting to de-risk that early investment. Without that action, we risk ceding our emerging floating offshore wind industry to competitors such as France, which has invested £900 million in its port of Brest.

By mobilising the National Wealth Fund, for example, to support strategic port infrastructure, the Government could absorb a meaningful share of the risk and give ports the confidence to proceed ahead of CfD awards, rather than waiting until it is too late. Some examples of that support could include forward contracts, capacity leasing arrangements and state underwritten procurement mechanisms to address strategic infrastructure bottlenecks, either as an anchor tenant—where the state acts as an anchor tenant through defence or strategic demand—or as an enabler, using that procurement and underwriting to support the development of infrastructure.

Finally, we must prioritise connectivity in the round, which means investing in the road and rail links that serve our ports, recognising them as national assets deserving of strategic infrastructure funding. We should also recognise ports as critical national infrastructure and use special development orders to streamline planning and consenting for significant port infrastructure. There is an ongoing pilot project for the Falmouth docks expansion. There is a co-ordinated approach under the Marine Management Organisation, which is acting as a lead regulator in a fast-track licensing process, and that is working well. Prioritising connectivity also means accelerating grid connections, so that energy capacity keeps pace with the demands of decarbonisation, future fuels and the development of floating offshore wind in the Celtic sea.

Ports new, old and rediscovered are the gateway to the rest of the world and gateway to the economic future of our country, as well as our coastal towns. They can be unlocked, but it will take focus and co-ordination. I, for one, really want to untap the potential that those young people living in our coastal towns see so clearly—and that they need to grab hold of for their future.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to speak, even in this heat, although jackets can be removed.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I want to say a special thank you to the hon. Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) for highlighting this important topic.

The title of this debate is “Ports and Port Connectivity”, but from Northern Ireland’s point of view, perhaps it should be “Ports and Port Non-connectivity”, and I will explain why. There is no port as such in my constituency, but we are on the outskirts of Belfast and the thriving agrifood sector in my constituency uses its port to ship all over the world. The Belfast port is incredibly important for my constituency and our agrifoods sector. We also have our harbours that bring in the fishing catches in Portavogie, although that is a different type of port.

As a representative of Northern Ireland, I am particularly concerned by the problems that the Windsor framework has created for those trading across our borders and between ports. I will explain what the difficulties are, and then perhaps the Minister can give us some answers. I welcome the Minister to his place and wish him well in this debate and in his job. I look forward to his answers to all my, hopefully, searching questions—well, even better answers would be better. I will also talk about Belfast port and some of the things that it is doing, because we should be greatly encouraged by some of the things that are happening there.

The Windsor framework continues to create friction at ports used for trading between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. Businesses report increased costs, administrative burdens or blunders, disruption to supply chains, delays and expanded inspections. Just last year, Logistics UK’s head of trade and devolved policy, Nichola Mallon, who is a former MLA at the Assembly and a lady of great knowledge, outlined that there is

“a lack of awareness over the practicalities of the Framework, and also a reluctance among some GB businesses”

to trade goods in Northern Ireland due to the extra requirements. We have almost unique difficulties. There was a statement about steel tariffs in the Chamber earlier, and I asked the Minister for Trade a question on a similar issue. He said that he had umpteen pages on the Windsor framework and was well aware of the issue—perhaps the Minister who is here can get us some of the way through the process.

Brexit created the challenge of how to maintain the integrity of both the UK internal market and the EU single market, given the unique position of the Northern Ireland borders. The aim of the Windsor framework was to ensure smooth trade between ports. There was much expectation, but we certainly did not get the Brexit that the rest of the United Kingdom got; we got one that is tied up in bureaucracy.

To some extent, the aim of smooth trade was oversold and created a misperception that the challenges faced by Northern Ireland over the Northern Ireland protocol could be removed—but that has not been the case. There continue to be significant new processes, and business owners continue to report frustration with the significant restrictions placed on them that drain their time, effort and money. When it comes to the ports and connectivity, we are not having the same connectivity as everybody else.

There is a significant basis for concern that Northern Ireland businesses may be placed at a competitive disadvantage with GB-based retailers in their own market. There is substantial evidence to prove that there is an issue, and I know that the Minister will be aware of some of that. I appreciate him acknowledging some of the problems.

Northern Ireland firms report higher costs on imports from GB, and there is frustration about the difficulties that third-country firms have faced when trying to sell to Northern Ireland. Those issues with smooth trading are disproportionately affecting small businesses in Northern Ireland, with many companies criticising the assistance available to them from Government. Again, if it is easy to make it simpler to trade, we should try very hard to do that.

More must be done to support vulnerable enterprises, 58% of which state that, almost 10 years on from Brexit, they are facing moderate to significant challenges in trading—10 years later and things have not improved. My goodness, that is quite unbelievable. Of businesses surveyed, 34% say they have simply ceased trading to Northern Ireland, rather than meet the demands of the framework. The paperwork is so laborious, complex and repetitive that it puts people off.

That clearly demonstrates that market access from Northern Ireland is compromised. Small business owners within Northern Ireland have been forced to adapt, and those retailing shorter shelf life products are now largely limited to trading within Northern Ireland, simply because it is not possible to do otherwise with short-life products. Other small businesses face increased export charges, which is another issue that they need to address. Some even report having to travel to England themselves as hauliers—as some of my constituents in Newtownards do every fortnight or every month—because hauliers are now reluctant to deliver due to the paperwork required.

There remains a need to restore Northern Ireland’s full place within the UK’s internal market, as it continues to be subject to certain EU rules while GB is not. It is essential that Northern Irish stakeholders play a meaningful role in improving trading problems to ensure trading operates effectively. The first issue that I have laid out is the protocol; it might have been a bit laborious, but it is complicated and I want to have it on the record.

There is still hope, however, as I, along with my right hon. Friends the Members for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson) and for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson), found in the recent announcement outlining Belfast harbour's ambitious 25-year masterplan. It includes a £1.3 billion investment to expand port capacity, support the green energy transition and regenerate the waterfront. The port handles roughly 70% of Northern Ireland seaborne trade and is scaling up to meet the rising demand and the capacity restraints elsewhere.

Northern Ireland is fortunate to have a large number of cruise ships; I have been informed that the figure is between 140 and 150. Cruise ships must be bigger than I thought they were, but if these figures are correct, some 350,000 people come off those cruise ships—I suppose they are absolutely massive. They bring tourism and spending to my Strangford constituency, which is not too far from Belfast. Tourists go to the National Trust-run Mount Stewart, the Greyabbey Cistercian monastery and Harrisons, my neighbourhood café-restaurant, which is just between Greyabbey and Kircubbin. That is a spin-off of being near Belfast.

I am coming to an end; I get the indication that might be a good idea. There is a real drive to enable Northern Ireland to be the hub it is designed to be. I welcome Belfast harbour’s ambition and belief. It is the turn of this House to have some ambition as well—to believe in the people of Northern Ireland and renegotiate with the EU to remove the needless restrictions and allow us all to prosper. Now is the time to make that difference.

I respectfully and honestly ask the Minister—because that is my way of doing things—to step in. We are going to have a change of Prime Minister, but we do not know whether there will be a change of Minister. I wish the Minister well and ask that he endeavours to help us in Northern Ireland to overcome some of our issues.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

Although only a few hon. Members want to speak, I wonder if we could limit speeches to around five minutes to get everybody in.

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. As many people will have already heard, East Thanet is surrounded on three sides by sea. From Ramsgate, we can see France on a clear day, but our port stands idle and neglected, despite its noble history as the home of the Navy during the Napoleonic wars. More recently, people will remember the hovercraft and the Sally Line ferries taking them to France for day trips. That is emblematic of some of the problems that we have with our ports in our island nation.

Ports connect us and defend us; they are places where we trade, where we welcome visitors and where we choose who stays. Our nation’s wealth has been built on ports as gateways to the world. We are the country that we are as a result of our ports and the people who built and worked in them. Yet for too long, we have overlooked them and the communities that sustained them, even as they remain vital to our economy. Many regional ports, including Ramsgate, operate well below capacity. If we are serious about levelling up and ensuring that the whole nation benefits from growth, we must look to how we bring trade and investment to ports that have been left behind.

In Ramsgate, Vattenfall employs 300 people to operate and maintain the wind farm, and there are plans for a green skills hub. Opportunities are there to be developed, yet the port is effectively shut, even though Ostend wants it to open for trade; Dover is already at capacity and would benefit from the growth of Ramsgate; and the lower Thames crossing, which the Government are fully committed to, will enable traffic and freight to move from my part of south-east England to the rest of the country.

We need to restore our connection to Europe for both trade and passengers, creating jobs and increasing our connections to the world. Overall, we need to be honest about what kind of impact Brexit has had on the ports in our country. In 2023, UK port traffic had decreased by nearly 13% compared with 2019. However, the EU still remains a significant partner, accounting for 48% of our goods exports and 54% of our imports in 2024. There are opportunities there to strengthen our relationship with Europe through investment in our ports. Ports are not only about freight; they connect us to our neighbours and support a thriving visitor economy. Some 18.1 million international passengers pass through UK ports every year—around 5,000 people daily. Cruise tourism alone injects £170 million directly into coastal communities, with Southampton’s cruise economy supporting £1 billion in wider economic impact.

I want to recognise three things that this Government have done to support our ports. First, they have brought forward a consultation on a revised national policy statement for ports, recognising that the planning framework needs to support future port development better. Secondly, they have used the National Wealth Fund and Great British Energy to back industrial and energy investment that depends on port infrastructure. Thirdly, they have begun to recognise more clearly that ports will be central to cleaner shipping and freight and the energy transition. Part of that is to do with the excellent work of this Minister and the Minister for Industry.

However, there are limits to the effectiveness of those measures. Investment is still at risk of being concentrated in the largest schemes and strongest ports, leaving many coastal communities without access to green economy benefits. The National Wealth Fund is capped, and the scale of need across our port infrastructure is much greater. Ramsgate needs only £20 million to be able to reopen with the support of private investors, yet the National Wealth Fund will not look at a project with a value of less than £50 million.

The Government still need to do more to link their port strategy to the overall coastal economic regeneration strategy so that the benefits are felt not only in national growth figures, but in the communities that keep our ports going. I have suggestions for three further steps that the Government could take without additional spending.

First, part of that coastal economic strategy should require a coastal economic area to be established within 5 km of the coast everywhere across the country. That way we could strategically invest in those coastal communities according to the industrial strategy. Regardless of everything else that they have, they have one thing in common: they are near the sea. Therefore we can see exactly how helpful and useful those ports are in terms of international and national infrastructure.

Secondly, we should mandate a capacity audit of all UK ports. We need to have transparent, published data about which ports are operating at full capacity and which are underused. Only then can we start to allocate resources and planning permissions strategically.

Finally, we need to review the allocation of the National Wealth Fund and require the industrial strategy to include a ports chapter. Critical minerals, green energy and defence supply chains all depend on ports. The Government need to be explicit about how ports fit into each sectoral strategy, ensuring that investment decisions are properly joined up. As my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) pointed out, we need to streamline planning and regulatory processes for port development. Delays and inconsistency in the planning system hold back investment. A dedicated fast track for port infrastructure within existing frameworks would accelerate delivery.

Ramsgate is actually owned by Thanet district council. It is publicly owned and there is a strong case for the public ownership of nationally significant infrastructure, such as ports, especially for an island nation. Yet, because of the way that we invest in our ports, it is struggling to make the most of its growth potential.

Ports are not relics of our past; they are a foundation for our future. For too long, we have taken them for granted. I urge the Government to give ports the strategic attention that they deserve—not just with warm words, but with action that reaches every port community in this country, including and especially Ramsgate.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

I am sorry, but to get everyone in I will have to move on to the Front Benchers at 4 pm. Could you please stick to a formal time limit of four minutes each?

Oral Answers to Questions

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Thursday 12th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lilian Greenwood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right; it is completely unacceptable that some unscrupulous people are exploiting learner drivers. That is precisely why we are changing the booking system to block those people from using it and taking action against driving instructors who misuse their access to the system.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

I thank the Minister for the measures she has outlined. In Edinburgh West this is a significant problem, and it seems to be a problem across the city. Young people, some of them graduates, cannot access driving tests, and then they cannot get jobs because they do not have a driving licence. They are facing long wait times and then sit repeated tests, which has an economic impact on them. Will the Department consider how it can support people who are facing economic impacts because of long wait times?

[Lilian Greenwood]

We do appreciate the impact that being unable to access a practical driving test has on young people. That is precisely why we are taking the further measures that I have described, and we are starting to see signs of improvement. Between June and December last year, the DVSA conducted 1,158,458 car practical driving tests. That is an increase of over 102,000 compared to the same period in 2024. I appreciate that people are impatient for improvement. We are working hard, and we are determined to deliver that improvement.

Airport Drop-off Charges

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Tuesday 13th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim McMahon]

I think so. It is not just about being fair; it is about being reasonable. We have all dropped loved ones off at the airport. We know how stressful it can be, and we know that the family member giving the lift normally tries to fit it around other things as well. Sometimes they will be dropping people off in the early hours of the morning. They rush to the airport, drop their loved ones off, say their goodbyes, make sure they get on the flight nice and safely, a bit upset perhaps that they are leaving, go home, maybe go to bed, and wake up in the morning—and before they know it, the day has taken over. It can be very easy to miss the deadline to pay. If it were extended from 24 hours to, say, 48 hours, most people would eventually say, “Hang on: I should have made that payment.”

It cannot be that every organisation relies on an app. In my town, the hospital and the leisure centre now have apps to pay, and so do some supermarkets. There are so many apps, and keeping track of them can be very difficult, so some people will have to search out how to make the payment. That is where the idea of reasonableness really comes in.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

A lot has been made of transport links to airports. At Edinburgh airport, we have excellent links—it is the end of the tramline and there are special buses—but if people are being picked up or dropped off, they have to pay £6 for the first 10 minutes and £1 for every minute after that. That is difficult for people on a fixed income. The holiday may be the big thing of the year, but if the flight is late they face bigger charges, so the principle of fairness does not seem to apply. Taxis also have to pay the charge, so there is an extra cost there too. Does the hon. Gentleman agree with me?

[Jim McMahon]

Many people ask their loved one to send them a message when they land or when they pass through the terminal ahead of collecting their baggage, but in Manchester airport there have occasionally been delays in getting the luggage off the plane and sent through to the terminal, or the conveyor belt has not worked in sending the luggage through, so faults with the airport or airline delays can lead to a penalty.

Oral Answers to Questions

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Lilian Greenwood)]

My hon. Friend is a great campaigner for road safety. He is right to raise this tragic case and the growing menace of drug driving. I am proud to tell him that our first drug driving focused THINK! campaign will be launching this coming Monday. If my hon. Friend —or indeed any Members across the House—would like to know more, they are very welcome to come along to the drop-in I am holding in W3 at 5 pm on Monday.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

T6. The City of Edinburgh council’s consultation on a new tram route has just closed, but there are newspaper reports in the city that officials are now in discussion with Government advisers about potential funding options. Can the Minister clarify whether that is the case and, if so, ensure that the views expressed in the consultation by my constituents will be adhered to?

[Heidi Alexander]

I am happy to talk to my officials about that particular scheme. If I may, I will come back to the hon. Lady in writing.

Oral Answers to Questions

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Thursday 11th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

Like my hon. Friend, I am a big fan of the Elizabeth line, and I commend him for his dogged support of the scheme on his constituents’ behalf. It is a significant addition to the transport network in London and the south-east, and it has had tangible positive impacts on the supply chain around the country, as well as providing faster journeys into and across London from Reading. I was proud to have personally helped deliver this new railway in my previous role in London, and to see that it has now supported around 55,000 full-time jobs, as well as creating over 1,000 apprenticeship opportunities.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

T8. Further to the earlier comments about driving test centres, the problem is serious in my constituency. All five of the closest centres have waiting times of 24 weeks —six months—and people are now looking to other parts of Scotland for tests. I appreciate what the Minister said about employing extra people, but can I ask that specific interest and special attention is given to Scotland, where this is a particular problem in rural areas?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will meet the hon. Member.

Mass Transit: West Yorkshire

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Tuesday 10th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

Order. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate.

Road Safety: Schools

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Wednesday 29th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

Order. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate. I ask them to limit their speeches to around four minutes.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth) on securing this important debate and on her excellent contribution.

One key aspect of road safety around schools is drop-off and pick-up time, as my hon. Friend the Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Tristan Osborne) has mentioned. I took action on that issue previously as a councillor—I continue to take action on it as an MP—working with fellow councillors, the local authority, the school leadership, the police and residents at Oakfield primary academy, where there had been problems the likes of which have been alluded to.

In Warwickshire, Eastlands primary school in my constituency was the site of a county council school street pilot scheme. Prior to that, there was what the council described as “inconsiderate parking”, “congestion”, and sometimes “complete gridlock” and a “threat to safety”. As I am sure we can all agree, that is a perennial problem, but the school street approach can help. In the case of the pilot scheme, restrictions were introduced using a traffic order. Two park-and-stride car parks gave parents alternative places to park and a new school crossing patrol on a busy road was implemented, all of which helped.

My experience in this space has led me to some observations, which the Minister will perhaps consider. Far more people are driving their children to school now than ever before. We may be able to do things with more public transport, safer cycle paths and more active lifestyles and walking, which are relevant to Government priorities for the NHS and transport in the long term. Some schools are in tightly packed residential streets, and that cannot be overcome in the short, medium or perhaps even long term. More children are attending schools away from their home address through either parental choice or local authority allocation. That can have an effect, because more journeys are being taken, so perhaps more work can be done on capacity.

Council enforcement can be done only when traffic regulation orders are in place, and they can be created only when a proper survey has taken place. Again, resources will then be an issue. I have spoken about this to the police, to which the public often turn. It can enforce only in some cases, and, with the best will in the world, it will never be able to enforce in this matter regularly. It is therefore vital that a partnership approach is used, whereby the school leadership liaises with parents and educates students, local residents are involved in discussions so that their frustrations are heard, the council and local councillors are aware and active, and the police are kept informed. I have tried to use that approach, and I have liaised with local residents. In the case of Oakfield primary, in my constituency, I encouraged a local business, Cemex, to pay for cartoon signs—I am sure we have all seen them around schools—designed to prevent people parking on grass verges or kerbs near the school. That has helped, as well.

More broadly, schools can consider other innovative options, such as arranging for students in some areas to walk to school. However, I am acutely aware that we need not to overburden hard-pressed teachers with additional responsibilities. They are already, quite understandably, reluctant to become quasi-traffic enforcement officers when dealing with people who are, after all, the parents of their students. I therefore welcome the Government’s renewed guidance, helping councils to deliver school streets that work for schools and local communities. I also commend the Government’s Active Travel England agency for recently releasing guidance to local authorities to help them implement school streets. It is important work.

In conclusion, there is no panacea, sadly, but more can definitely be done. I am glad that Warwickshire county council, working with local borough councils, hopes to introduce more school street schemes, focusing on primary schools. Those schemes can have a profound effect on improving the health of young people, reducing the risk of disagreements between parents and local residents, and, most importantly, making our schools much safer for our young people.

[Christine Jardine (in the Chair)]

Would the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) like to make some remarks? We will then move on to the Front Bench at eight minutes past.

Airport Expansion

Christine Jardine Excerpts

Tuesday 28th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mike Kane]

I thank my hon. Friend for his chairmanship of the Environmental Audit Committee, of which I was a proud member for many years, looking at the circular economy, which this Government are taking forward. The Government have committed to delivering greener transport, including through SAF, airspace modernisation and the other measures that I laid out. I am proud of that range of measures. The Front-Bench across this Department are decarbonising the transport sector further and faster in the first six months of this Government than in 14 years of the last.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

The Minister has made a great deal of the position of my party on Heathrow airport. As he is such a fan of our Focus leaflets, I am sure he will know from my own that I have consistently raised airport noise, opposition to the expansion of Heathrow, sustainable aviation fuel and airspace management in this place. How will he make the airspace management plan fit with any forthcoming emissions and capacity management framework? We have yet to hear from the Government about that, but the Liberal Democrats consider it vital to the future sustainability of the air transport industry in this country.

[Mike Kane]

I am generally very grateful for the Liberal Democrats’ support for airspace modernisation. It is complicated and difficult. We are throwing our hat over the wall in trying to reach it. It will be easier in certain parts of our country than others, but we have already taken action. We set up the airspace modernisation design service. We are bringing the best and the brightest together. If we can make the planes fly in a straight line, we will use less carbon. It is the lowest of low-hanging fruit for carbon reduction in the aviation sector, and we are moving at pace on it.