Tag: Speeches

  • Heidi Alexander – 2026 Statement on HS2

    Heidi Alexander – 2026 Statement on HS2

    The statement made by Heidi Alexander, the Secretary of State for Transport, in the House of Commons on 19 May 2026.

    Overview

    Today, alongside my oral statement in the House, I am publishing this government’s latest report to Parliament on High Speed Two (HS2).

    Over the past year, Mark Wild and HS2 Ltd have worked closely with my department and other partners in government to assess the remaining scope of work, and to estimate thoroughly how long it will take and how much it will cost to complete the project. The government has accepted his advice on the revised cost and schedule for completing HS2, and I am now sharing these figures publicly.

    The expected cost of delivering HS2 is now in the range of £ 87.7 – 102.7 billion. This is expressed in a mixed price base, including the cash outturn of works to date and the costs of future work excluding inflation. This represents £ 70.9 – 82.2 billion in an equivalent 2019 mixed price base – a stark increase on the previous cost range of £35 – 45 billion (2019 prices) set under the previous government.

    These ranges cover the cost of the whole programme, stretching from London Euston to Birmingham Curzon Street and to the connection to the West Coast Main Line at Handsacre Junction, which will enable HS2 services to continue to the Northwest and Scotland. This includes the indicative expected cost of delivering HS2 to Euston, some of which we intend to fund through private finance and other sources.

    Regarding schedule, the delivery of HS2’s opening stage is now expected between May 2036 and October 2039. This will see the first trains running between Old Oak Common in west London and Birmingham Curzon Street. We estimate that the full scheme, including both Euston to the south and Handsacre Junction to the north, will open between May 2040 and December 2043.

    Two thirds of this expected cost increase are a combination of necessary works that were missed from the scope of the original project plan, under-estimation and inefficient delivery. These are issues that were within the control of HS2 Ltd, some of its suppliers, and previous governments, and these lessons are being applied following the James Stewart Review.

    A third of the cost increase is linked to inflation, which has significantly impacted the British economy over the past five years. The cost estimate for the programme was updated in the past to account for inflation, but not regularly enough. To reflect inflation more accurately in the future, including any impacts arising from the current conflict in the Middle East, we will update the price base every two years in line with future Spending Reviews.

    As I set out in my interim Parliamentary Report in March, I asked HS2 Ltd CEO Mark Wild to present the government with options to reduce the complexity and over-specification of HS2 in order to bring down costs and delivery timelines. HS2 Ltd, in collaboration with my department, has reported on the initial outcomes of this work, and following robust assurance and consideration at a Ministerial Task Force, I have accepted the recommendation to bring HS2 into line with proven leading European high-speed operating standards, including operating HS2 at up to 320 kilometres per hour (kph), as it supports our endeavour to bring HS2 into operation safely at the lowest reasonable cost.

    HS2’s initial work on speed specification suggests that by aligning with other top railways in Europe we could potentially save between £1 billion and £2.5 billion over the life of the delivery programme, by reducing testing and commissioning time, opening earlier and with reduced costs compared to existing plans. The main savings come from avoiding the risks associated with certifying a railway at a speed not operated anywhere in the world.

    This is an initial assessment that will mature further as the work is refined into a full programme baseline, but HS2 Ltd, and my department, are confident this will make it more likely that HS2 is delivered at the lowest reasonable cost. This change provides an opportunity to reduce the risks involved in delivering HS2 by aligning the speed and systems used with tried-and-tested operations in the UK and Europe – simplifying the remaining work to be delivered. The reduction in top speed will be modest and brings HS2 in line with the fastest high-speed services already operating in Europe, relying on proven technology and systems. Initial assessments indicate that journey times from London to Birmingham will increase by 3 minutes, and will still be 30 minutes faster than the current service, whilst delivering the capacity we need and supporting future economic growth along the line, and around the stations.

    Mark Wild has set his organisation the challenging ambition of delivering the programme at a cost of £ 93.2 billion and an initial opening date of late 2037 for trains running between Old Oak Common and Birmingham Curzon Street. This ambition deliberately sits within the lower half of the ranges to drive better and more efficient delivery. We support it, which gives him a clear mandate to drive down costs and improve productivity.

    As the reset progresses and a full delivery baseline is developed, I recognise that additional information might result in HS2 Ltd reporting above this ambition in the future. If that is the case, the ambition will remain useful to incentivise better productivity within the ranges I have published today.

    Past estimates of both cost and schedule have proven clearly inaccurate. Given the need to rebuild public trust, it was essential that we learn lessons from past failures and take the time to develop a robust set of figures, as recommended by James Stewart in his review commissioned by this government. The new estimates and their methodologies have been thoroughly assessed and scrutinised, including by a panel of experts who have successfully delivered railways internationally and domestically, like the Elizabeth Line. An Accounting Officer Assessment was produced alongside the new ranges.

    However, these estimates do not disguise the fact that HS2 Ltd has already spent close to the original budget. The reset work also makes clear that progress on finishing the civil engineering for the entire line of route is at least four years behind the original schedule, and that the time required to test and commission HS2 to ensure a reliable and safe service was underestimated by another three years. The number of years left to complete the programme is roughly the same as when construction started in 2020, and it is likely we will need to spend the same amount as has already been spent to date.

    It is now imperative that we proceed with the final stages of the HS2 reset so that the programme is brought under control and delivered sensibly going forward.

    Despite the significant challenges, the programme is at peak delivery, with 31,000 people and thousands of UK businesses working hard to deliver HS2. Delivery progress continues to be made, with the contract for HS2’s rolling stock depot at Washwood Heath, in Birmingham, awarded to a joint venture of Taylor Woodrow Infrastructure Ltd and Aureos Rail Ltd. We are starting to see results from reset: HS2 is now being built faster and more efficiently, with six major construction milestones reached earlier than planned last financial year, and with early signs looking positive for this year’s milestones. Work will continue over the coming year, with the final stages of the reset expected to conclude in the first half of 2027. Under new leadership, HS2 Ltd is putting construction back in logical order, strengthening commercial controls, restructuring the organisation, and rebuilding the partnership with government. 

    When faced with such a difficult inheritance, I could have chosen to cancel the project and remediate the construction undertaken so far. The costs of doing so are considerable and could cost as much as completing HS2, and would result in no lasting benefit, abandoning ambitions for better national transport across our railway network and potentially leaving communities across our country blighted by unused infrastructure – something I am simply not prepared to do. Communities affected by HS2 do not want to live near half-finished structures that serve no useful purpose without a railway. The economic growth that HS2 is already driving in the West Midlands, and at Old Oak Common, through new housing development, job creation and local regeneration, would be significantly impacted. Instead, this government is committed to doing the responsible thing: facing the challenge head-on so that we can leave the country’s infrastructure in a better condition than when we started.

    Increasing the capacity and performance of the current network will drive economic growth. The southern section of the West Coast Main Line is congested and this limits the number of trains that can reliably run, and the number of passengers who can travel. Despite large urban centres, labour productivity in the West Midlands and the North West lags behind the national average. Faster trains will transform this, and extend these benefits to North Wales and Scotland too. This government has been clear on its mission to transform infrastructure across the country, and we are pursuing reforms that will improve our ability to deliver projects. Completing the project remains vital for economic growth and the capacity of our rail network.

    The same will be true of our plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR), which will deliver a turn up and go railway across the city regions of the Northern Growth Corridor – better connecting Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Bradford, Sheffield, and York, with faster and more regular services to Newcastle, Chester and Hull. Development work is underway and we will maintain our focus on applying the lessons from the successful delivery of the Transpennine upgrade, and from HS2, ensuring that we improve our delivery of major rail projects across the country. We also announced our long-term intent for a full new rail line connecting Birmingham and Manchester, which informed our decision on NPR. This will not be a revival of HS2 and no decisions have been taken on the specification or timetable for delivery. In the meantime, we will retain land the government has already purchased between the West Midlands and Crewe.

    These new estimates, alongside cost and schedule ambitions to incentivise better delivery, provide a robust foundation for completing the final stages of the reset. Looking ahead, our focus will remain on delivering the railway safely, as soon as possible, and at the lowest reasonable cost.

    Wider reset

    A key focus of the HS2 reset work has been to put the building blocks of the programme back in the right order. HS2 Ltd has assessed what it will take to finish the civils works on the line of route and stations, to deliver the rail systems, and to deploy the rolling stock, test the railway and drive reliability before starting passenger services.

    Over the coming year, HS2 Ltd will be developing a new Baseline for the programme to provide a clear scope of work and path to delivery. It will also form the basis for performance monitoring and reporting by the department to ensure that the project is robustly managed once the reset is complete. I have instructed my officials to update the programme’s business case to ensure that we reflect the changes in HS2’s delivery.

    In the meantime, with better contract management, clearer accountability and stronger project controls, the reset is enabling us to put taxpayers’ money to better use and deliver more construction in year for less expenditure than previously. In the 2025/26 financial year, HS2 Ltd delivered over 10% more progress on construction than planned with the same amount of money.

    Taking earthworks as an example, over 2025/26, HS2 Ltd moved 25.0 million cubic metres compared to a plan of 20.8 million, an improvement of 20%. Construction costs are tracking below forecast and delivery performance improved over the past year, with six major milestones on tunnels and roads completed ahead of in-year schedule. These included the sliding of a road bridge for the A46 over the HS2 route in April 2025, the installation of precast beams and overbridges over Station Road near Calvert in August 2025, and the second breakthrough on the Bromford tunnel in Birmingham in October 2025. The north portal structure at the Chiltern tunnel was completed in 12 months, several months faster than the south portal, thanks to lessons learned and innovative construction methods. The excavation of the 8.4-mile Northolt tunnel, the second longest on HS2, was completed on schedule in June 2025 despite complex ground conditions.

    These improvements have been supported by HS2 Ltd introducing an improved programme control framework. Teams are using new tools and mechanisms, allowing them to better track planned works against actual progress and delivery on the ground, and enabling better problem identification and reporting of progress. Weekly performance reviews enable construction teams to identify problems quickly and resolve issues before they escalate, creating a more responsive and accountable approach. This has taken place while key health and safety indicators have also improved.

    HS2 Ltd’s new management team inherited a challenging commercial position. Prior to the reset, commercial capabilities and the management of HS2’s construction contracts were not effective. HS2 Ltd’s ability to settle commercial matters progressively and contemporaneously had deteriorated and become insufficient over recent years. Consequently, large backlogs had been allowed to develop in relation to cost verification, cost finalisation and contract change.

    HS2 Ltd has since concentrated on strengthening its commercial controls. New commercial roles have been created to focus on cost verification and contract management, to scrutinise every payment application, to challenge contractor claims, and to manage contracts in taxpayers’ interests. These improvements must be fully embedded in the company, and endure beyond completion of the reset, to the conclusion of the programme.

    HS2 Ltd is also engaging with its key supply chain partners to review contracts, close out historic payments only where appropriate and justified, and seek opportunities to incentivise improved performance. This work will be critical to stabilising costs and enabling us to make the spend on HS2 as efficient as possible. I will update on progress in my next report.

    HS2 Ltd was set up to deliver a multiphase programme and grew accordingly; this multiphase programme no longer exists. Consequently, HS2 Ltd is being transformed into a lean and accountable delivery body focused on safe delivery between London and the West Midlands at the lowest reasonable cost. Given the overlap of alignment with elements of HS2’s former Phase 2, HS2 Ltd was already developing infrastructure for Northern Powerhouse Rail between Liverpool and Manchester. To make best use of taxpayers’ money and avoid additional costs through alternative arrangements, this work will continue and is being brigaded into a separate business unit, pending longer-term decisions about delivery responsibility for this scheme. The high-level plan we recently announced for Northern Powerhouse Rail remains unaffected by the new cost and schedule ranges for HS2.

    HS2 Ltd did not have the right skills, structure or culture to deliver a programme of this scale successfully. Major steps are being taken to restructure the organisation to control and deliver HS2 more effectively, including:

    • reshaping the corporate centre, reducing headcount by cutting 300 corporate roles and rebalancing the organisation to better support delivery teams
    • redirecting resources to boost frontline delivery capacity by 40%, with 168 additional roles focused on cost management, oversight and decision-making
    • bringing in skilled and experienced professionals across commercial, technical, assurance, controls, and finance functions to fill critical capability gaps

    As a result, there has also been significant restructuring of the leadership team at HS2 Ltd. This includes appointing a new Director of Business Delivery to reshape the organisation and a Chief Commercial Officer to provide additional commercial leadership, a gap identified in James Stewart’s review. Looking ahead, the department is also working closely with DfT Operator and Network Rail to strengthen the voice of the future operator into the delivery programme and deliver HS2 as part of an integrated railway.

    The reset has begun bearing fruit, and I expect continued progress through the financial year as work progresses on completing the delivery baseline, implementing the new commercial strategy and reshaping HS2 Ltd.

    Applying and learning lessons

    As part of the reset, the department has been working with HS2 Ltd to address the significant challenges identified by James Stewart in his major transport projects governance and assurance review. Both organisations remain committed to the implementation of all of the review’s recommendations. The department is also working with HM Treasury and HS2 Ltd to implement the recommendations made in the Office for Value Money’s study on the governance and budgeting arrangement for mega projects.

    The government accepted all 89 of James Stewart’s recommendations in June last year, and since then good progress has been made in implementing them, with both the department and HS2 Ltd on track to implement the remaining recommendations by the end of the programme reset, recognising that delivering the principles of the review will be an enduring endeavour for the lifetime of the programme. I am pleased that James has agreed to join the HS2 Shareholder Board to help ensure that the principles of his review are delivered in full.

    The review found that multiple layers of assurance cause duplication and delays, driven by a lack of trust. The department has worked with HS2 Ltd and government partners to implement streamlined governance. This includes using the new Mega Projects Decision Panel to replace existing approval processes and oversee the HS2 reset process, alongside the Ministerial Task Force that this government reinstated. To support effective decision-making, the department has also implemented an integrated approach to assurance, bringing cross-government partners and external experts together to scrutinise the reset and utilising experts to assure the approach. Improvements to culture and trust are being put in place across the two organisations.

    The review also highlighted weaknesses in HS2 Ltd’s corporate governance. The appointment of Mike Brown as Chair of HS2 Ltd and his subsequent strengthening of the Board are significant steps in addressing this. The HS2 Ltd Board’s roles and responsibilities have been clarified, with strengthened arrangements for compliance and organisational capability; enhancing delivery expertise within the Board and the company; and ensuring robust oversight through the Board’s sub-committees.

    Learning is being embedded across current and future projects through:

    • independent assurance reviews of major projects, including Euston, Heathrow, Northern Powerhouse Rail, East West Rail, and the A66 Northern Trans-Pennine
    • resetting the department’s programme of work to improve project delivery
    • dissemination of learning across the department, its arm’s-length bodies, and wider government
    • monitoring progress on wider government recommendations in partnership with the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority

    Following the publication of the review in June 2025, the Prime Minister asked the Cabinet Secretary to consider the Civil Service and the wider public sector’s stewardship of the HS2 programme, and whether further investigation was warranted. The Cabinet Secretary commissioned Sir Stephen Lovegrove, former National Security Adviser, to undertake a review focusing on accountability, governance and capability. The review has been published today; the government will respond to its recommendations after thorough consideration of the findings.

    Oversight

    We have continued to strengthen oversight structures to drive performance and accountability. We established a new Shareholder Board, chaired by the Permanent Secretary and with independent membership, to provide more effective oversight. This Board has met six times over the last year. A monthly Programme Performance Board has been established to ensure and oversee the effective delivery of HS2 against agreed schedule, cost and scope.

    Alongside regular bilateral meetings between government ministers, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and I have attended all meetings of the Ministerial Task Force to deliver effective oversight. Since my report in July 2025, it has met four times to review progress on both delivery and the reset; to agree HS2 Ltd’s commercial strategy; to agree the updated schedule and cost ranges for the delivery of HS2; and to consider the early findings of the work on HS2 speed specification.

    On his appointment, I tasked Mike Brown with reviewing the capacity and capability of the HS2 Ltd Board and its effectiveness. On his recommendation, I have appointed six new Non-Executive Directors which will bolster senior leadership capability in infrastructure delivery, health and safety, business transformation and commercial relationships.

    While better governance alone is not enough to bring performance back on track, effective oversight, clear accountability and purpose-driven structures will be essential in improving management of the programme’s delivery.

    Expenditure

    To the end of March 2026, £44.2 billion (nominal prices) had been spent on the HS2 programme. This is provided in more detail in the financial annex, based on data provided by HS2 Ltd.

    Spend to date information covers the period up to the end of March 2026. Unless stated otherwise, all figures are presented in nominal prices.  

    At the 2025 Spending Review, the government allocated a £25.3 billion capital settlement for HS2 Ltd from Financial Years 2026/27 to 2029/30 in order to progress delivery of HS2 from the West Midlands to London Euston. The HS2 programme reset work is underpinned by this settlement, and the annual funding allocations remain unchanged.

    Euston

    We have made significant progress in developing affordable, integrated plans for the Euston Campus, with all partners confirming their support for an overall spatial plan. The HS2 station will include 6 platforms, supporting all foreseeable Phase 1 services. Space will also be provided for additional platforms should they be required to support a future expansion of the network. In addition, the redevelopment of the existing Euston Station will deliver a new station concourse that will accommodate current and future passenger demand on the West Coast Main Line, while replacing life-expired station assets in a cost-effective manner.

    We are working at pace with our Master Development Partner, Lendlease, on a Masterplan for Euston, with an emphasis on economic growth and delivering much needed housing, and will set out a plan in due course. We are also exploring models for development across the wider Euston area with local partners.

    In April 2026, the Euston Delivery Company assumed the leadership role for the Euston campus and became the single directing mind for the Euston programme, delivering a cross-campus approach to the next stage of design work. Initially, the Euston Delivery Company will sit as a business unit within the department as we build its capability. We expect the company to be stood up as a public body in the Autumn.  

    With our significant public commitment to funding HS2 into Euston, we believe that the additional investment required to build the new HS2 station at Euston is an exciting opportunity for private investors. As referenced in the government’s 10-Year Infrastructure Strategy, the department is exploring the use of a public-private partnership to design, build, finance and maintain this HS2 station. We are continuing to advance this work, in close collaboration with HM Treasury and the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority.

    In February 2026, the department launched the first stage of preliminary market engagement which sought to raise industry awareness of the project and the department’s emerging plans, assess potential market appetite and identify priority issues for the market at an early stage, to support refinement of the proposed commercial and procurement approach. Confirmation of using a public-private partnership model will be subject to achieving appropriate risk transfer and delivering value for money for taxpayers. We will also continue to explore the most effective ways to capture the value created by development unlocked through transport infrastructure and recycle it to repay public investment, including through a tax increment financing-style mechanism at Euston.

    The updated cost range for HS2 published today includes an early estimate of the cost of delivering the HS2 and London Underground elements of the Euston programme, some of which we intend to fund through private finance and other sources. While at an earlier stage of maturity than the wider HS2 reset, these costs will be reviewed and refined as work progresses, and further updates will be provided as part of regular parliamentary reporting. An updated budget for Euston will be subject to further development of design and schedule. The redevelopment of the existing Euston Station concourse area is subject to separate funding via the Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline.

    Progress has been made on ‘meanwhile uses’ to reduce the impact on the local community. In July 2025, the new Euston Community Hub opened in the former Maria Fidelis school and has since had over 7,000 visitors. The Hub, located at the heart of Euston, provides a dynamic space for community sector organisations and public service providers to carry out various programmes and community-led activities, initiatives and engagement. It will also serve as a central information point for residents and passengers, providing regular updates and engagement opportunities about plans to redevelop Euston. September 2025 also saw the opening of the Construction Skills Yard, where local people can gain experience of being on site, get trained on machinery in a realistic environment, and use the site facilities. The new training hub, which expands the existing Euston Skills Centre is being used to deliver skills courses and create more opportunities for residents to access local jobs in the construction industry, and on the Euston station works.

    Benefits

    Economic growth and housing

    HS2 will provide people with more choice about where to work, and where to study. Economic growth will also be driven by increased leisure travel, as it becomes quicker and easier for people to visit friends or explore different parts of the UK.

    By bringing businesses closer together, HS2 will make it easier to share knowledge and enable them to access more workers in different locations. As a result, HS2 will attract new businesses to local areas, in turn driving increased investment and economic activity.

    The economic benefits of HS2 are already being seen with the programme’s four new stations acting as catalysts for significant local growth and regeneration. HS2 estimate this will support the generation of over 63,000 new homes, 49,000 new jobs and an economic uplift of £20 billion in the West Midlands and west London over the next 10 years. HS2 is supporting the early development we are already seeing in Birmingham and the West Midlands, helping to catalyse investment in exciting new areas such as the Sports Quarter.

    HS2 will also have a significant impact around Euston station. Euston is one of the largest development opportunities in central London and its potential is enhanced by the connectivity HS2 will provide. Recent estimates from the London Borough of Camden suggest that by 2053 a mix of new homes and commercial development could deliver an economic uplift of around £41 billion and support the creation of 34,000 new jobs.

    Alongside the reset, HS2 Ltd is exploring opportunities for early release of land at key locations: Old Oak Common, Interchange, Curzon Street and Washwood Heath, enabling some land holdings to be brought into use while the railway is being built. This work aims to unlock potential for new homes, retail and commercial development.

    This approach means we can deliver regeneration benefits as early as possible, creating lasting economic value alongside railway construction rather than waiting until completion of the railway. Each site represents a significant opportunity to boost local economies and support this government’s growth agenda. We are working closely with local authorities, communities, stakeholders, developers and investors throughout this process to help realise these opportunities.

    HS2’s economic benefits will extend beyond the new stations, as HS2 services will extend and provide better journeys to the Northwest and Scotland, with faster journeys also possible through onward connections to areas including North Wales. The delivery of this new railway will also release capacity to meet increasing demand for regional, local and freight services between London and the West Midlands, further supporting growth in the local communities along that route.

    Skills and innovation

    People are at the heart of HS2 and its benefits, as the programme continues to support around 31,000 jobs.

    I am proud of the impact HS2 is already having on the lives of people being brought into the workforce. So far, 5,771 previously unemployed people have been brought into work since Phase 1 Royal Assent.

    We are also making great progress on supporting apprentices and have achieved a significant milestone this year with 2,136 apprenticeships created since 2017, breaking the 2,000 target that had been set for the programme. These apprenticeships will have a lasting impact on the individuals who have completed their programmes and help to develop a skilled and modern workforce, leaving a lasting skills legacy for the construction industry.

    Innovation also remains central to HS2’s delivery. As part of the programme reset, HS2 Ltd is working with some of the UK’s leading tech specialists – bringing in expertise from beyond the rail sector – to tackle key challenges, including improving value for money, boosting site productivity, and enhancing safety management. Through its partnership with Connected Places Catapult, the HS2 Innovation Accelerator has supported start-ups and tech innovators since 2020, delivering cost savings, funding and investment of over £250 million, creating hundreds of new jobs in science and tech and attracting investment into SMEs.

    Community impacts, land and property

    Community engagement

    Due to the delays to delivery, the impacts of construction will be felt by communities along the line of route for longer. HS2 Ltd continues to inform and involve communities who are impacted by construction and the uncertainty caused by the project reset. Between April 2025 and March 2026, over 21,000 residents were engaged at over 3,000 meetings and events. A further 29,406 enquiries were received via the HS2 Ltd Helpdesk, which operates 24 hours a day.

    During the same period, HS2 Ltd received 1,405 complaints, the vast majority of which continue to relate to the impacts of construction, including concerns about traffic and transport disruption and noise and vibration impacts. HS2 Ltd is committed to resolving complaints promptly. Of the 1,405 complaints received, HS2 Ltd resolved 100% of urgent complaints within 2 working days and resolved 98% of all other complaints within 20 working days or less.

    Local funds

    One of the ways in which HS2 currently offers mitigation, benefits and compensation for line-of-route communities affected by construction is through the £40 million Community and Environment Fund and the Business and Local Economy Fund. This fund will continue to be available throughout the prolonged construction period. As at April 2026, over £22.3 million has been invested in communities and businesses that have been demonstrably disrupted by the construction of HS2, delivering 405 projects that will leave an enduring legacy.

    Land, property and remediation

    This government has recognised the need to make faster progress in settling outstanding property compensation claims, which in the past were taking far too long to reach final settlement. HS2 Ltd has now significantly increased the rate at which claims on Phase 1 are being settled, but we have made clear to the company that further improvement is needed.

    In January, the government confirmed its intention to retain existing land holdings previously acquired for HS2 between the West Midlands and Crewe, in line with its intention to ultimately deliver a new rail line between Birmingham and Manchester.

    HS2 Ltd is speaking to property owners whose land has been acquired in order to progress outstanding claims. HS2 Ltd and the supply chain have begun to engage with landowners of temporarily acquired land alongside local authorities to agree necessary remediation plans. We anticipate the remediation programme will conclude by the end of 2027.

    The powers to compulsory purchase land on the former HS2 Phase 2a route expired on 11 February 2026. The government has the option to seek to extend these powers in the future, if required; we will set out our future intentions on land powers, consents and safeguarding in due course.

    Along the Phase 1 route, HS2 Ltd has identified a number of surplus properties for potential disposal and has begun to market these. We have already sold a small number of Phase 1 properties as part of a pilot project and anticipate selling an increasing number over the coming years as continued progress in building the railway means we are able to release properties back to the market.

    Following the lifting of safeguarding between the West Midlands and Leeds that I announced in my report in July 2025, the department has commenced a programme to sell land and property that is no longer required on the former Phase 2 route, starting with 558 properties on the former Phase 2b Eastern Leg.

    A delivery agent has been appointed to lead on delivering the programme and we expect open market sales to begin later in 2026. HS2 Ltd will continue to manage properties on behalf of the department.

    The disposal process will comply with the Crichel Down Rules, giving former owners, or their successors, whose properties were acquired under statutory blight or compulsory purchase, an opportunity to reacquire their former property at its current market value.

    This programme will be phased over several years and carried out carefully to minimise disruption to local communities, protect local property markets, and ensure value for money for taxpayers.

    Wider rail network

    One of the lessons we are learning from HS2 is the need to approach the infrastructure needs of the rail network as a unified system, rather than a collection of separate projects. The government’s ultimate intention to deliver a full new rail line between Birmingham and Manchester will help to maximise the national benefits of both HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail and safeguard future growth for the long term, by ensuring that the West Coast Main Line corridor offers sufficient capacity and good connectivity. Further work will be carried out in collaboration with local partners on what will be delivered and when, but we expect the delivery timelines for this line to follow the completion of HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail.

    As the department prepares to establish Great British Railways (GBR) and continues to bring passenger services back under public ownership, we are considering options for how HS2 services and infrastructure will be integrated. GBR will improve services for passengers and freight users, transition the rail network towards greater financial sustainability, and unlock barriers to the delivery of future schemes. As such, I am clear HS2 needs to be delivered and operated in a way that supports these objectives.

    The planned approach to HS2’s operations must align with GBR’s operating model as it develops. The HS2 service will need to align with and complement the wider rail network. Decisions on the operational model for HS2 and its interaction with GBR are being carefully considered. It is likely that transitional states will be required in order to de-risk the process and protect our ability to deliver the HS2 project and services during this period.

    Financial annex

    Total estimated cost range

    HS2 is forecast to cost £87.7 – £102.7 billion. This is expressed in a mixed price base, including the costs of both works to date and future work excluding inflation.

    As committed to Parliament in my previous report, the cost ranges provided also express spend after Q3 2019 in 2019 values excluding projected inflation. This approach ensures that costs can be reconciled against figures previously communicated to Parliament and the public.

    HS2 programme ranges

    £ billionLowHigh
    Q3 202587.7102.7
    Q3 201970.982.2

    Notes

    Q3 2025 ranges

    [1] Spend up to September 2025 is expressed in nominal to reflect the cash spent on the programme (£40.9 billion). This approach is consistent with the government’s Parliamentary reporting and HS2 Ltd’s management of costs since Notice to Proceed in 2020, in which spend prior to Q3 2019 was treated in nominal.

    [2] The remaining costs-to-go are presented in the prices of the day (Q3 2025) excluding forecast general and construction inflation. When the price base of the programme is reset every two years in line with future Spending Reviews, the lower and upper bound of the ranges will increase commensurately with inflation actually incurred over this period.

    [3] The ranges include the full cost of delivering HS2 to Euston, some of which we intend to fund through private finance and other sources such as tax increment financing.

    Q3 2019 ranges

    [4] Note the Notice to Proceed Funding Envelope was constructed by uprating expenditure between 2015 and Q3 2019 to Q3 2019 prices.

    Overall nominal cost

    [5] Indicatively, the provisional cash estimate based on the lower and upper bound for the overall cost of the HS2 programme is £94.3 billion – £112.4 billion in cash terms, including projected inflation forecast using HS2 Ltd’s bespoke inflation indices.

    Historic and forecast expenditure

    The information on HS2’s overall spend to date and budget is now being provided in nominal (cash) terms following a commitment made by the department to the Public Accounts Committee to express the costs of the programme in a more up-to-date price base and better capture the inflation incurred since 2019. The government will provide further details on the 2026 to 2027 position in cash terms as part of the standard Main Estimates report to Parliament.

    This is expressed in nominal prices, including land and property.

    Overall spend to date
    (£ billion)    		2026 to 2027 budget
    (£ billion)    		2026 to 2027 forecast
    (£ billion)    		2026 to 2027 variance
    (£ billion)
    HS2 Programme Total44.27.17.10.0
    Civils31.25.25.20.0
    Stations4.81.01.00.0
    Systems0.30.20.20.0
    Indirects4.10.50.50.0
    Land and Property3.70.20.20.0
    Former Phase 22.60.10.10.0
    Overall Total46.87.27.20.0
  • Mel Stride – 2026 Speech on Backing Business to Create Economic Growth

    Mel Stride – 2026 Speech on Backing Business to Create Economic Growth

    The speech made by Mel Stride, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons on 18 May 2026.

    This King’s Speech is an empty vessel, which is a surprise, because only last week the Prime Minister was telling anybody who cared to listen that the Government would be leaning into economic growth in a more radical way, and would eschew managerial incrementalism, yet we have heard nothing other than managerial incrementalism, at best, from the right hon. Lady just now. [Interruption.] Of course, I meant the right hon. Gentleman. If only the Chancellor were here, Mr Speaker, I would be right about everything.

    The Prime Minister also said that Labour would tread more lightly on our lives. Well, we have seen what that has meant in the last few weeks. The Chancellor said that it would all be growth, growth, growth. The Secretary of State trots out and trumpets the latest uplift—a very modest one—in the International Monetary Fund’s forecast, but he neglects to mention that although it is forecasting 1% growth today, it forecast 1.3% back in January.

    The Secretary of State also neglects to mention that the increase in growth in the first quarter of this year is on the back of risible growth performance in Q4 of last year. The situation in Q4 was exacerbated, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility and the Bank of England, by the Chancellor’s making every possible tax rise; that had a material impact—it depressed the economy. Some of the growth is simply a bounce back from the mistakes made at the end of last year.

    The Secretary of State refused to answer the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns) about what happened to GDP per capita, so let me tell him that it has been utterly anaemic throughout this Government’s period in office. He also failed to mention that the notes to the IMF’s comments on upgrading the growth forecast for this year point to domestic uncertainty possibly weighing down on consumer spending and investment decisions. I wonder what “domestic uncertainty” could possibly be referring to. As to our record, I remind the Secretary of State that on the day of the general election, the previous Conservative Government had inflation bang on target at 2%. It is now 50% more than that. We also had the fastest growth in the G7, employment at near record levels, and near record low levels of unemployment, and we had 13 consecutive months of real wage growth.

    Max Wilkinson
    (Cheltenham) (LD)
    On the subject of mistakes made and growth, does the shadow Chancellor accept that the Brexit that he and his party left us has knocked between 4% and 8% off our GDP?

    Sir Mel Stride
    As I will come on to argue, our problems actually rest a little closer to home, rather than having anything to do with our relationship with the European Union.

    The Labour party promised stability. It also—Members should try not to laugh too loudly—said that it would create the most pro-business Government in the history of our country. None of that has come to pass. It is not just the Prime Minister who is the problem; if this Prime Minister is replaced, whoever goes on to lead the Labour party will not do any better, because Labour had no plan at all for improving our economy. It had a plan for winning an election—keep as low a profile as possible, hold the Ming vase and tiptoe across the shiny floor towards that loveless landslide—but no plan for the people of our country. The Labour Government are in hock to their Back Benchers. Every time they try to do something that requires some backbone, they are stopped by their Back Benchers.

    The record of this Government is appalling, and not just on growth. I notice that the Secretary of State did not mention unemployment once, and he certainly did not mention youth unemployment. Under this Government, we are seeing the highest unemployment in five years, and youth unemployment is nudging up towards 20%. Under the previous Labour Government, youth unemployment increased by more than 40%; under the previous Conservative Government, it reduced by more than 40%.

    Sir Ashley Fox
    (Bridgwater) (Con)
    Is it not shameful that the Government are having to subsidise employers who take on young people, when it is the Government’s actions—their imposing higher national insurance charges, a higher minimum wage, and a higher burden through the Employment Rights Act 2025—that caused the problem in the first place?

    Sir Mel Stride
    My hon. Friend is entirely right. It is like trying to apply the accelerator while having the brake on fully. That is what this Government are doing. That is the total illogicality of their approach.

    Inflation is up on where it was under the Conservatives. It is about the highest in the G7; it certainly was last year. As we lean into the challenges of oil and gas price spikes, that is a weak position to be in. Most economists will make that point. The Labour Government will have borrowed a full quarter of a trillion pounds more across this Parliament than would have been borrowed under the plans that they inherited. It is no wonder that our borrowing costs are the highest in the G7—higher than those of Greece, and higher, even, than those of Morocco. Why? We know why: it is just what socialists do. Socialists believe that you can tax your way to prosperity, but I tell the Secretary of State: you cannot.

    The £25 billion of additional tax on businesses—national insurance increases—has crucified business in this country. The burden has fallen predominantly on young people, because there was not just an increase in the rate, but a reduction to the threshold at which the tax cuts in, meaning that young people have borne the brunt of that tax increase. The sectors that rely predominantly on first-time jobbers and on young, part-time and female workers have been crucified, including the retail, hospitality and leisure sectors, in which more than 100,000 jobs have been destroyed by this Government.

    Alison Griffiths
    (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con)
    On Friday, I opened the new Premier Inn in my constituency—a project that was passed under the last Conservative Government—but many businesses in my constituency are failing because of increased costs and regulation. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this is an absolute travesty for our country?

    Sir Mel Stride
    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I have had the great pleasure of visiting her constituency to speak to businesses, and that is exactly what they complain of. The Government made no effort, in the King’s Speech, to get on top of the benefits bill. There was a reference to the Timms review of the personal independence payment, but we know that in the review’s terms of reference, there is an explicit statement that it is not about controlling the welfare bill. There will be no savings as a consequence of the Timms review. That is not good enough. We have got to be about getting people off benefits and back into work.

    Tom Tugendhat
    Does my right hon. Friend not agree that we are seeing not only young people let down, but the deeply immoral act of people being kept on welfare? In five or 10 years’ time, people will have been on welfare for so long that they will not have any options. They will effectively have been left slaves of a state that has no concern for them. Nobody in this Chamber will have any power over how the welfare state will behave then, and those people will have no options. It will be the fault of this House and this Government for having kept those people there, and having imprisoned them.

    Sir Mel Stride
    That is entirely right. The Conservatives know that work matters, and getting people off benefits matters. People’s mental health is improved by going to work, and by having the social interaction, routine and sense of pride and self-worth that comes with work. That is why the level of unemployment and the failure of this Government to tackle benefits is so appalling.

    Dawn Butler
    (Brent East) (Lab)
    I used to work in the employment service, and Thatcher encouraged us not to sign people on, and to instead put them on the sick. The Conservatives created a whole generation of people on the sick, just to manipulate the numbers. How do you like those apples?

    Sir Mel Stride
    All these flashbacks to the 1980s are a slightly desperate attempt to get away from the 2020s, I think.

    The other thing that socialists love to do is borrow, borrow, borrow, and spend, spend, spend until they have run out of other people’s money. That is precisely what this Government have done. The Secretary of State mentioned the fiscal rules, but of course he failed to mention that in the run-up to the election, the Chancellor said that she would abide by our fiscal rules, and then promptly changed them, so that she could borrow more, flipping the definition of “debt” from public sector net debt to public sector financial liabilities. That allowed her to take her foot off the brake and borrow and spend even more.

    Charlie Maynard
    (Witney) (LD)
    Flashing back to the 1980s, would the right hon. Member like to remind us when the Conservatives last balanced a budget?

    Sir Mel Stride
    The current account went into a slight surplus just around 2015-16. [Interruption.] It did, actually. That was on the back of our inheriting a £160 billion deficit in 2010, which was over 10% of GDP—another example of the disasters of a Labour Government.

    The Secretary of State rightly spoke of artificial intelligence and the opportunities that it presents, but what we know of artificial intelligence is that it will have a profound and very uncertain effect on the labour market. We need a flexible skills offer to deal with that, and flexible labour markets, but through the Employment Rights Act, the Government are making the labour market more rigid, and that will hurt younger people in particular, who do not have a track record in employment, so do not be surprised if youth unemployment continues to hover around 16% or 17% as a consequence of the actions of this Government.

    When it comes to leaning into these challenges, we know that there is no plan. This Government are not going to do anything. They are just involved in internecine introspection—a civil war, now—within the Labour party. They said that they would tread lightly on our lives; in fact, they are now stampeding all over them. The rivals to the Prime Minister will be looking to double-down on the ruinous policies that I have just set out.

    We have seen the real effects of this in recent days. On Friday, after the former Member for Makerfield said that he would step down in order to ease the passage of Andy Burnham to this place, what happened to gilt yields? They spiked up 18 basis points. I have done a little bit of research, and I can tell the House that, if sustained through the forecast period, that would mean over £5 billion of additional debt servicing costs. That is about £300 for every working family in this country. That is the effect of Andy Burnham, and he has not even arrived here yet.

    We are on the edge of a precipice economically, leaning into a very turbulent time. These are the policies of the madhouse, yet we are told not to worry. The hon. Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker), who I believe is an outrider for Andy Burnham, said of the bond markets that they would just have to “fall into line”. Andy Burnham himself said in the New Statesman:

    “We’ve got to go beyond this thing”—

    Paula Barker
    (Liverpool Wavertree) (Lab)
    Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

    Sir Mel Stride
    I will in a moment.

    Paula Barker
    On a point of order, Mr Speaker. My understanding is that if an hon. Member wishes to mention another hon. Member in the Chamber, they are supposed to give advance notice of that. I have received no such notice.

    Mr Speaker
    That is not the case. A Member should be informed if they are not here, but the hon. Lady is sitting here, quite rightly, and I am sure that the shadow Chancellor is ready to give way immediately.

    Sir Mel Stride
    I am always ready to give way, Mr Speaker, and to take your direction.

    Paula Barker
    Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the shadow Minister for giving way. I agree that what I said might not have been the most eloquent of answers. However, I would say that people in this country are fed up of the bond markets dabbling in the democracy of our country.

    Sir Mel Stride
    That is a rather unfortunate example of doubling down or continuing to dig, if I may say so. Also, the hon. Lady’s comments pale in comparison with Andy Burnham’s comments in the New Statesman, where he said:

    “We’ve got to go beyond this thing of being in hock to the bond markets”.

    He also suggested that defence spending should lie outside the fiscal rules, as if spending and borrowing to defend our country were a different form of borrowing from any other borrowing that this Government might entertain. He is not so much the king of the north; he is more like King Canute, sitting in his chair on the sand, dressed in his football kit, trying to push back the tide of the bond markets and saying things like, “You’ve got to fall in line” as the waters lap at his ankles and we all ultimately get swept away. It is ludicrous.

    The King’s Speech included a holiday tax that will increase the cost of the most budget holidays in this country, clobbering people who have saved up hard and just want to make some memories with their children. We also have the nationalisation of steel, which seems to be just some kind of political sop to the left on the Labour Benches.

    The Government are also going to put a stop to new oil and gas exploration. This is lunacy, when we are importing gas from Norway that is extracted from the same basin. We are also importing liquefied natural gas, formerly from Qatar and now predominantly from the United States, which has four times the carbon footprint compared with if we had extracted it ourselves using our own resources. All that energy security blown, all those jobs destroyed and all that tax revenue forgone, simply because of the ideological madness of the Labour party.

    Harriet Cross
    The shadow Chancellor is completely right to reflect on the plight of the oil and gas sector under this Labour Government: 1,000 jobs are being lost in the sector every single month, which is affecting all our constituents, not just those in the north-east of Scotland. Does he share my dismay that a Labour Government do not take that more seriously?

    Sir Mel Stride
    I do indeed. I have been up to Aberdeen, met my hon. Friend and heard at first hand about the economic effect this is having. It is utter madness. If we have an opportunity in government, we will put that right.

    I have already mentioned benefits. There was nothing of any substance about welfare in this King’s Speech. There was nothing about the defence investment plan. Where is it? It was promised back in September.

    Then we have the regulating for growth Bill—an oxymoron if ever there was one. “Regulating for growth” says all we need to know about this Labour Government. They know nothing about the economy, nothing about job creation and nothing about businesses.

    Jim Shannon
    Will the shadow Minister give way?

    Sir Mel Stride
    Briefly.

    Jim Shannon
    I thank the shadow Minister for what he is saying. Does he share my concern, and the concerns of probably many in this House, that small and medium-sized businesses will suffer more than most? The figures for Northern Ireland indicate that between 85% and 89% of the job creators there are small businesses. Northern Ireland needs something special from this Government. Does he see something special coming, or are we just wondering what is going to happen?

    Sir Mel Stride
    I am afraid that what I see coming is what is already baked in: business rates going through the roof. In some cases, small businesses on our high streets are facing 140% increases in the amount they have to pay in business rates.

    Conservative Members believe in enterprise, opportunity, aspiration and markets. We believe in risk takers, in people who work hard, and in people who get up early in the morning and do the right thing—go out and create wealth, create jobs and grow our economy. Because of that, at our last conference we set out £47 billion-worth of savings, predominantly—£23 billion—on the welfare budget. With that we could do two wonderful things: first, we could start to bear down on the deficit and get on top of the debt, which is out of control under this Government; and secondly, we could get taxes down, particularly on the productive parts of the economy. We therefore announced the abolition of stamp duty and a tax cut for young people.

    There is more in our alternative King’s Speech: a Bill to back our high streets and cut business rates for a quarter of a million of our high street businesses; a get Britain working Bill to reverse the damage done by the Employment Rights Act; a reducing bureaucracy Bill to remove the mountain of environmental, social and governance regulations; a save British industry Bill to get rid of the Climate Change Act 2008 and abolish the zero emission vehicle mandate; a cheap energy Bill to get rid of renewables subsidies and bring down bills for households and businesses; a getting Britain drilling Bill to reinvigorate our North sea oil and gas industry, creating jobs and boosting our exports; and a welfare reform Bill to get the benefits bill under control and restore the two-child cap. That is the serious plan that our economy needs. That is the plan to back our businesses and deliver growth. That is a Conservative plan for a better Britain.

  • Matthew Pennycook – 2026 Speech to UKREiiF 2026

    Matthew Pennycook – 2026 Speech to UKREiiF 2026

    The speech made by Matthew Pennycook, the Housing Minister, in Leeds on 19 May 2026.

    [This is the version issued by the Ministry of Housing with two small sections of political content redacted]

    Thank you for that kind introduction and good morning, ladies and gentlemen – it is a pleasure to join you here in Leeds.

    Since its launch four years ago, UKREiiF has gone from strength to strength.

    It is now a catalyst for significant investment and growth, generating economic activity in every part of the country including this growing and fast, dynamic city, and the wider West Yorkshire region.

    As a domestic forum for discussion, networking and deal making between investors, developers and local authorities looking to shape the future of our towns, cities and regions, it is now unrivalled.

    And for those looking to attract global capital, and, dare I say it, government ministers whose diaries don’t always lend themselves to intense four-day events in the Mediterranean, it arguably now surpasses its overseas rivals.

    I want to thank everyone involved in organising this annual event, including the City Council and various partners, for all they have done to make it the success that it is.

    I’m here at UKREiiF today to discuss what more can be done to secure investment; drive regeneration; and accelerate development in every part of the country.

    To exchange views about how together, we can tackle the housing crisis, support economic growth and ensure that the real estate, property and infrastructure sectors flourish.

    And I come with a simple message: this [Political content removed] government arrived in office with a bold and comprehensive plan to build the homes and infrastructure the country needs.

    We are faithfully executing that plan.

    It is beginning to bear fruit.

    And while the headwinds are undoubtedly growing stronger, we are going to stay the course and finish the job.

    Uninformed critics will no doubt decry my reference to stronger headwinds as an attempt to deflect blame for early falls in housing delivery that I can assure all of you were fully expected and anticipated in opposition.

    But everyone in this room will know that the very real challenges that the sector has experienced over recent years – rising interest rates, significant increases in building materials costs, and dampened buyer demand – have been exacerbated by the global turbulence of recent months.

    I want you to know that the Secretary of State and I are acutely aware of the more uncertain environment in which you are now operating.

    We also appreciate that your present challenges follow a series of housing market downturns, the scars of which your cash reserves, supply chains and project pipelines still bear.

    Where compatible with our objectives as a government, we remain committed to doing everything we can to reduce development risks and associated transaction costs so that you can get on and build.

    But it is only together that we can successfully navigate these tumultuous times, working in partnership to create a housing system that is more resilient to economic shocks of the kind produced by the conflict in the Gulf.

    The case for fundamentally transforming the housing system that we inherited is unarguable.

    By any metric, it has been an abject failure.

    As I’ve argued many times, in many different parts of the country: the crisis of housing availability, affordability and quality that that system has produced is blighting lives and hampering economic growth and productivity.

    That is why, as a government, we set ourselves the task of reforming this failing system root and branch.

    Over recent days, I’ve listened with some amusement to colleagues claim that we arrived in government underprepared and lacking clarity of vision and direction.

    When it comes to housing and planning, nothing could be further from the truth.

    We used every waking moment in opposition to develop a bold and comprehensive plan – one that over the past twenty-two and a half months has allowed us to undertake the most rapid, holistic and radical overhaul of the housing and planning system in decades.

    Within six months of taking office, you will know that we published a revised National Planning Policy Framework.

    Through it, we restored and raised mandatory housing targets; strengthened brownfield land policy; and introduced a modernised, strategic approach to Green Belt land designation and release.

    The Office for Budget Responsibility have estimated that these changes alone will boost GDP by £6.8 billion by 2029/30 and will lead to the highest level of housebuilding in 40 years.

    In December last year, we built on those initial revisions, publishing for consultation a wholly restructured Framework.

    This modified NPPF incorporates new clear and rules-based national policies for both plan and decision-making and includes new policies such as a permanent presumption in favour of suitably located development and a “default yes” for suitable proposals that develop land around rail stations.

    In the same month, our landmark Planning and Infrastructure Act received Royal Assent.

    This Act is already enabling us to speed up and streamline the delivery of new homes and critical infrastructure, not least by allowing the dismissal of legal challenges to DCOs that are ‘totally without merit’.  

    Once we have switched on the Act in its entirety, including overhauling the consenting process for critical infrastructure; our new Nature Restoration Fund; new mechanisms for cross-boundary strategic planning; and the modernisation of planning committees, we estimate that this single piece of legislation could boost GDP by up to £7.5 billion over the next decade.

    Having received the final report of the independent New Towns Taskforce in September last year, we launched a public consultation in March on our proposed New Towns Programme.

    The large-scale new communities that this will create will make a significant contribution to meeting housing need across England and support economic growth by releasing the productive potential of our constrained towns and cities.

    The programme is an integral part of our plans to boost innovation, quality and competition in housebuilding.

    Given the critical importance of boosting the supply of social and affordable housing for meeting housing need, sustaining the wider development pipeline and supporting timely build out, we have delivered the biggest boost to grant funding in a generation through our £39 billion Social and Affordable Homes Programme and we’ve given Registered Providers the regulatory certainty and stability they need to quickly ramp up investment in existing and new stock.

    And that is not all.

    On arriving in office, we quickly established a New Homes Accelerator that has helped remove blockages and speed up the building of over 130,000 homes across England…

    We have created a new, permanent National Housing Bank backed by £16 billion of new financial capacity…

    We are putting in place a new plan-making system and taking concerted action to drive up local plan coverage…

    We are progressing a range of policy and regulatory easements to help small and medium sized housebuilders thrive and grow and thereby diversify our housebuilding market…

    We have allocated almost £100 million of investment to support local planning authorities with capacity and capability…

    We have invested over £600 million in training tens of thousands of new construction workers.

    We’re reforming the Building Safety Regulator established by the previous government to improve its operations and processes.

    I could easily go on ladies and gentlemen.

    My point in reeling off this long list is a simple one: no government in living memory has done more to tackle the country’s housing and infrastructure deficit than the one I am proud to be a member of.

    While much has been done, there obviously remains much more to do as we strive to hit our incredibly stretching target of 1.5 million new homes in this Parliament.

    We do need to finalise a range of legislative and policy measures.

    We have to publish a final, revised NPPF, and we will do so this summer.

    We have to bring into force our new National Scheme of Delegation, and we will lay the required regulations in the coming weeks.

    We have to consult on the first of our Environmental Delivery Plans concerning nutrient pollution and we will do so in the coming months.

    We must reform the role of statutory consultees in the planning system, and we will announce the outcome of our consultation on this matter before the summer recess.

    Yet, the focus of my Department has now turned very firmly towards ensuring the new system delivers.

    Among other things that means a renewed emphasis on removing ‘grit’ from the planning process to ensure that the application journey is as fast and easy as possible, and it also means a greater focus on what more we can do to support consented sites that are struggling.

    Our New Homes Accelerator will play a crucial role in this effort.

    It has already unblocked and accelerated the delivery of scores of large sites that were encountering significant delays or obstacles – providing planning advice, technical assistance, and brokering across government, including with stat cons.

    To take just two examples:

    At Hampden Fields in Buckinghamshire, engagement with the Environment Agency through the NHA enabled all flood risk activity permits to be promptly issued and the first homes are now being occupied.

    At Langley in the West Midlands, the NHA provided funding for technical support for site design that will enable the project to deliver homes more efficiently.

    Across the country, the NHA is currently supporting 28 sites, and we’ve expanded the scope of the sites that it can now support.

    New sites, like Northwest Sittingbourne in Kent and Benthall Grange in Shropshire, are continuously being added and the NHA online portals remain permanently open for any projects that might require support.

    Homes England, as the government’s principal housing delivery arm, also has a critical role to play in accelerating development and ramping up housing supply.

    Under the leadership of Pat Ritchie and Amy Rees, it is delivering.

    In the last financial year, the Agency supported the completion of over 40,000 homes and leveraged £22.6 billion of private sector investment.

    Under its new regional operating model, it is working more closely than ever with local leaders to support housing delivery including Richard and our partners in the West Midlands who will launch the Birmingham East Mayoral Development Corporation at this event later this morning.

    The Agency is also integral to the delivery of important initiatives such as our Small Sites Aggregator and building on the pilots in Bristol, Lewisham, and Sheffield, I am pleased today to confirm its national rollout.

    The initiative will unlock dormant, unviable small brownfield sites and through the forging of new partnerships between the public and private sector will attract investment to use them to build 10,000 social rent homes a year.

    And to further support communities build new homes and drive innovation, I can announce today that we are working with 23 ambitious local authorities to co-develop a pattern book of standard house designs which we intend to publish by the end of the year.

    These designs will help unlock economies of scale to support investment in MMC, remove barriers for SME developers, and help local authorities deliver homes on small sites they own.

    Ladies and gentlemen let me finish by saying this…

    As a government, we have been clear that we refuse to accept the stagnation and decline that we were bequeathed.

    As a country we enjoy world leading expertise in engineering, construction, planning, design, finance and project management.

    We have a well known tendency to downplay our strengths but the quality of some of our placemaking is second to none.

    We have it in our power, in other words, to lead the world when it comes to urban development and regeneration.

    And yet our full potential remains unfulfilled.

    When it comes to housing and infrastructure, unlike [Political content removed], we have been prepared to will the means as well as the ends and to bear the opprobrium of those content with a failing status quo.

    But getting Britain building again is not in the gift of ministers alone. Much as I wish it were otherwise.

    It requires every part of industry to play its part.

    Now we know things are incredibly tough right now.

    We want you to be frank with us about the challenges you face, and what might be done to help you overcome them.

    If you share our objectives, we want to support you in any way we can. 

    But we also need your help because it is only together that we can ensure that our country enjoys high and sustainable rates of housebuilding and world class infrastructure provision in the years ahead.

    And I very much look forward to continuing to work with you all in pursuit of that aim.

    Thank you for listening.

  • Yvette Cooper – 2026 Comments on the Strait of Hormuz

    Yvette Cooper – 2026 Comments on the Strait of Hormuz

    The comments made by Yvette Cooper, the Foreign Secretary, on 19 May 2026.

    The world is sleepwalking into a global food crisis. We cannot risk tens of millions of people going hungry because one country has hijacked an international shipping lane. Iran’s continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz while the agriculture clock is ticking shows why we need urgent global pressure to get the Strait reopened, fertiliser and fuel moving and ease the costs of living pressures. That is why we will continue to lead calls for the immediate and unrestricted opening of the Strait and advance plans for the Strait of Hormuz Multinational Mission to support any agreement. 

    This crisis is affecting developed and developing countries, the private and public sectors alike. It shows why we need a new approach to global partnerships, to drive international development to prevent crises in the first place.  

    The world has changed faster than the international system can support it. This conference reflects our modern approach to development working in a new spirit of partnership and building new coalitions to drive a world free from poverty on a liveable planet.  

    Our commitment to international development reflects our values and our national interest. In an increasingly interconnected world, instability abroad affects us here at home, from energy prices to food security. Building resilience abroad makes the UK stronger, that’s what this week’s conference is about.

  • Keir Starmer – 2026 Comments on Small Businesses

    Keir Starmer – 2026 Comments on Small Businesses

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister, on 19 May 2026.

    Small businesses are the backbone of our economy – run by people who take risks, create jobs and keep communities going. This government is firmly on their side.

    Too many small business owners are spending hours chasing money they are owed and when payments don’t come through, the cost is personal. It’s about whether you can pay your staff, keep the lights on, or invest in your future.

    Today we’re changing that with the toughest action on late payments in a generation, so small businesses get paid on time and get the backing they need to grow, create jobs and serve their communities.

  • Peter Kyle – 2026 Speech on Backing Business to Create Economic Growth

    Peter Kyle – 2026 Speech on Backing Business to Create Economic Growth

    The speech made by Peter Kyle, the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, in the House of Commons on 18 May 2026.

    Mr Speaker, I heard your call for decency and respect, and I hope those will be the watchwords for today’s debate.

    My right hon. Friend the Chancellor is with her G7 colleagues today, so I am grateful for the opportunity to open the King’s Speech debate on backing British business to create economic growth. That is economic growth for a purpose: not simply to exceed the growth rate of other European members of the G7, which we achieved in the last year; not simply to have the highest growth rate in the G7, which we achieved in the last quarter; and not simply to deliver on the Government’s primary mission; but for the purpose of achieving greater social justice for all.

    Economic growth is the surest path to higher living standards, improved public services and better quality of life for people up and down our country. We know that economic growth is the catalyst for new opportunities, the pathway to greater prosperity, and the vehicle for greater equality and security for working people. That is why it matters so much.

    The growth figures published last week show that, despite the many international headwinds, the UK economy grew by 0.6% in the last quarter—the fastest growth among G7 countries. There is silence from the Opposition Benches. I would have thought that the party that champions Britain and calls for economic growth would be celebrating economic growth when they see it, but no: silence, silence, silence.

    The situation is much better than the one we inherited, continuing to exceed the forecast of the doom-and-gloom mongers on the Opposition Benches and in the right-wing media, and even beating market expectations. When the Conservatives were in government, they and their strangely related first cousins, Reform, let down Britain’s economic future. Now, in opposition, they talk down Britain’s economic present. You can bet your bottom dollar that they will do so again today, ignoring the facts.

    The facts are that the UK experienced the highest GDP growth among European countries in the G7 last year. Just today, the International Monetary Fund has upgraded the UK growth forecast, with the UK projected to have the fastest cumulative growth among European G7 economies over 2026 and 2027. None of this happened by accident, just like the damage done to the economy by the Tories did not happen by accident.

    Alicia Kearns
    (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)
    Does the Secretary of State not concede that GDP per capita is down? Can he tell me that a single one of his constituents, apart from those on welfare, feels better off under this Government?

    Peter Kyle
    The whole purpose of the debate is to emphasise that economic growth matters. In the last full year in which the Conservatives were in office, economic growth stood at 0.4%. In the first full year of this Government, it was 1.4%. The hon. Lady should be apologising for the state in which she left the economy, leaving us to pick up the pieces.

    This growth has been driven by an activist, interventionist Government who back British business—a Government who are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and make the big calls when big times demand it. From Jaguar Land Rover in the west midlands to Ineos in Scotland, Agratas in the south-west, Tata Steel in Wales, and Harland & Wolff across the United Kingdom, we step in to invest, modernise and protect British industry when necessary. We step back by reducing unnecessary regulation when that is possible, and step up to modernise our critical national economic infrastructure where that is vital: supporting the third runway at Heathrow that the Conservative party curtailed; expanding the Oxford-Cambridge corridor where the Conservative party hesitated; backing Northern Powerhouse Rail which the Conservative party cancelled. This Government have confirmed £45 billion of funding for Northern Powerhouse Rail to upgrade lines east of the Pennines and to bring forward a brand-new route connecting Liverpool and Manchester.

    Harriet Cross
    (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
    That was a great list, but what was missing from it was the oil and gas sector, and specifically the £17 billion of investment that was lost as a result of the Government not scrapping the energy profits levy and the £50 billion of investment lost because of their ban on new licences, and other hostile policies. Will the Secretary of State reflect on those, and on the damage that the Government are doing to growth not only in the north-east of Scotland but in the United Kingdom as a whole?

    Peter Kyle
    This Government have invested in industry up and down the country, from Agratas in the south-west, where we are investing in gigafactories, to Ineos in Scotland. We are investing in the industries that are keeping our country going, and we have put growth into the economy.

    Gavin Robinson
    (Belfast East) (DUP)
    The Secretary of State was kind enough to mention Harland & Wolff. Successive Governments have introduced a number of support measures, and have ensured that that company can thrive by itself. However, in taking at face value what the Secretary of State has said, does he recognise that if this Government continue to refuse to designate Programme Euston a defence project and open it to international tender, not only will they not support British business and yards like Harland & Wolff, but the project will be delayed by three years? If the Secretary of State wants to inject business growth and economic growth, he should designate it a UK defence project, and keep the work and the investment in the UK.

    Peter Kyle
    The right hon. Gentleman knows full well the commitment that I personally have to Northern Ireland and its economic success. All the issues related to national resilience are things that we have to consider at this moment in time, unlike any other moment in time in peacetime. They are issues that I look at very closely, and in the days and weeks ahead I shall be talking a great deal more about how we can support industry and business across Northern Ireland.

    Jim Shannon
    (Strangford) (DUP)
    I commend the Secretary of State for what he is saying. I know he is a regular visitor to Northern Ireland because he loves the country, and we appreciate that.

    According to the Federation of Small Businesses in Northern Ireland, more than half the enterprises trading between Great Britain and Northern Ireland face severe friction, with more than a third halting trade entirely. Can the Secretary of State explain explicitly how the proposed regulating for growth Bill will help? I know he is committed to it, so let us hear what he has to say.

    Peter Kyle
    I have been aware of those issues from opposition into government. Of course, rebuilding the relationship with the European Union is also partly about smoothing that barrier across the Irish sea, and we will continue to do so.

    We are building the critical national economic infrastructure that the Conservative party consistently failed to deliver, on runways, reservoirs and railways. Just as we are modernising Britain’s critical economic infrastructure, we are maximising Britain’s industrial strength by delivering our modern industrial strategy. Written for business with business, our strategy creates the right conditions for business to succeed. Since its publication, we have been tackling the high costs of energy. Our supercharger saves firms hundreds of millions of pounds every year, and our British industrial competitiveness scheme will help more than 10,000 eligible manufacturing businesses, saving them up to £40 per megawatt hour from next April. I am very aware of challenges faced by the ceramics sector; I will meet representatives of the sector tomorrow to discuss how the Government might be able to support it, and I hope to be able to say more about that very soon.

    To cut the red tape that is holding back British businesses we are ending mandatory strategic reports for medium-sized companies and ending directors’ reports for businesses of all sizes, saving firms £230 million each and every year. We are stripping out unnecessary rules and regulations. Through the regulating for growth Bill, announced in the King’s Speech, we will create regulatory sandboxes—economic growth laboratories where innovators can trial cutting-edge technologies safely and speedily.

    Whereas the Conservatives, with their destructive ideology of deliberate de-industrialisation—from monetarist Thatcherism to Brexit isolationism—drove British manufacturing businesses to the wall and destroyed the jobs that depend on them, this Government are determined to maximise the UK’s competitive advantage, not just through reindustrialisation, though that is necessary, but through new industrialisation in advanced manufacturing, clean energy, artificial intelligence and new technology. That is why we have rolled out new AI growth zones and confirmed the site of the UK’s first small modular reactor—a milestone in the journey to becoming a clean energy superpower.

    Gregory Stafford
    (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)
    The Secretary of State talks about deregulation, but does he not accept that adding 330 pages-worth of regulation in the Employment Rights Act 2025, at a cost of a billion pounds to the economy, is having the opposite effect? Youth unemployment in my constituency has gone up by 28% in just one year.

    Peter Kyle
    I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the opportunity to point out that, in my Department, the overall net regulatory burden is reducing, not expanding. I will not stand in front of the Tories and apologise for giving new rights to workers that are fit for the age we are living in. Over their entire 14 years in office the Tories failed to make sure that people have protections and rights at work that are fit for the age we are living in. We can move forward with growth in the economy that takes forward businesses and the people who work in them. That is to be celebrated, not condemned like the Tories are doing.

    John Glen
    (Salisbury) (Con)
    The right hon. Gentleman is, quite reasonably, setting out his assertions about where he wants the Government to go, but does he not see the irony? After all the events of last week, the cost of borrowing in the UK is higher than that of many of our competitors, and all business leaders say they feel the instability. The right hon. Gentleman’s words will not ring very true for people who seriously wonder about the Government’s future direction, with putative leadership contenders talking about fundamental changes in direction and different fiscal rules.

    Peter Kyle
    The right hon. Member mentions irony; this is from the party that gave us the Liz Truss mini-Budget, which wreaked havoc on our economy. Mortgage rates went up for every mortgage holder across the country, with inflation peaking at 12%, yet the Conservatives talk about instability. The country still lives with the instability that they wreaked on it.

    Our major expansion of DRIVE35 is channelling investment into batteries, electric motors and power electronics—part of the biggest Government investment in the British car industry since the second world war. “Invest”, “modernise” and “protect” are the watchwords for the new industrialisation of Britain through our biggest industries, our biggest sectors and our boldest companies.

    Iqbal Mohamed
    (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
    The Secretary of State talks about deregulation, but we have seen what that has led to in the finance sector, the banking sector and the water industry: consumers end up paying the price. The Secretary of State also talks about AI; speaking way back in 2014, Stephen Hawking cautioned:

    “The development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.”

    Why do the Government believe that deregulating AI is going to assist their growth mission? It will put consumers’ lives and the human race at risk.

    Peter Kyle
    The Government are investing in AI infrastructure, but also making sure that the regulatory and legislative landscape is up to date for the time we are living in. The hon. Gentleman wants to turn the clock back. The world is awash with AI technology. We cannot stop it coming to our country, but we can shape how it interacts with our economy and its people. That is why we are investing in the training of 7.5 million people throughout the economy, including a million students, to make sure we can seize the opportunities that AI presents but also protect people from the potential damage it could cause.

    Not only are we creating the conditions for new industrialisation, but we are ambitious for the success of Britain’s small businesses. Our “Backing your Business” plan is one of the most generous packages of support rolled out by any Government, with new hospitality zones and reduced red tape for bars and cafés. We have brought in an £11 billion lending package to help small firms to grow internationally and take advantage of the trade agreements we have negotiated with India, South Korea and the United States. This may trigger the Opposition, but we are also going to deepen Britain’s trading relationship with the European Union, Britain’s most significant international marketplace. That is what our European partnership Bill is all about.

    Vikki Slade
    (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
    I welcome the deepening of the relationship with the EU and the measures on late payments, but the elephant in the room is that while the jobs tax exists, and the Government do not make the most of business rate changes in retail, hospitality and leisure, the benefit to small businesses is more than outweighed by the extra difficulties they face. Does the Secretary of State accept that there need to be changes on that front, even if we have to wait until the Budget for them?

    Peter Kyle
    Once again, the Lib Dems condemn every fundraising measure we have brought in to invest in our public services and get our country back on its feet, but they never say how they will pay for the alternative. They never say how they will raise the money themselves. I am not going to apologise for any of the measures. I will come in a moment to the investment we have made in small businesses and in hospitality, and I will give way to the hon. Lady again if she wants me to at the time, but will she please say what the alternative is from her perspective? The Lib Dems want to spend all the money in the world but they do not want to tell people how it is.

    The lending commitment we have secured with the UK’s five leading banks will support Britain’s small businesses to succeed and prosper. Our business rates support package, worth £4.3 billion, will protect ratepayers from large overnight increases in bills. We have introduced permanently lower multipliers for retail, hospitality and leisure properties. That is worth nearly £1 billion a year and will benefit over three quarters of a million properties.

    I know that many businesses, particularly in the hospitality and retail sectors, would like us to go further. I get that. They are impacted by changes in the shopping and social habits of their customers, as well as the financial and geopolitical pressures in the wider economy. We are absolutely aware of and attuned to that. However, the crocodile tears of the Conservatives about these industries are laughable and lamentable. Theirs is the party that urged us to join the costly military action in the Gulf, which will heap further pressure on hospitality and other sectors throughout the economy. It is not our war, but the Conservative party would make British businesses and consumers pay the price.

    Ben Obese-Jecty
    (Huntingdon) (Con)
    The Secretary of State mentions crocodile tears; what would he say to the hospitality businesses in my constituency that have been impacted by the rise in national insurance contributions, the minimum wage rise and the business rates that he just talked so effusively about? What message would he give to them as they struggle to deal with the outcome of the Budget?

    Peter Kyle
    Unfortunately, none of the Conservative Members was listening to what I just said in outlining the measures we are taking, and the admission that we get it and we are listening. Fundamentally and foundationally, what those businesses need is what every business in this country needs, which is a growing economy. In the last year the Conservatives were in office, growth was 0.4%, but in the first year in office of this Government, it was 1.4%. That is what every business needs across the country, and when it comes to specific sectors at specific moments in time, we are watching and attuned, and I am acting where necessary. When the right hon. Member for Central Devon (Sir Mel Stride) addresses the House, I am certain that on that and so much more he will display all the symptoms of the economic illiteracy and ideological incompetence that for too long have engulfed the Conservative party. By contrast, we are taking practical action to end these conditions.

    We are bringing in new measures to tackle late payments. The small business protections (late payments) Bill will give the UK the strongest legal framework in the entire G7. Late payments cost the UK economy £11 billion a year, forcing the closure of 38 businesses every single day. For 14 years it was the same under the Conservatives, and they did nothing. The Bill tackles the scourge of late payments, brings in stronger powers for the Small Business Commissioner, sets out strict maximum payment terms of 60 days, and bans the deduction of retentions in construction contracts. The Federation of Small Businesses has said that tackling late payment is one of the biggest things the Government can do to help small businesses to grow. That is the difference that an activist, interventionist Labour Government can make.

    Finally, let me turn to another example of the difference. The ghost of free market Thatcherism still haunts many of the industrial areas of this country. It can be seen in the scars of de-industrialisation still marking too many communities around our country. It is high time to exorcise the ghost of de-industrialisation. When I published the steel strategy last month, I told the House I would never hesitate to fight for British industry in defence of the national interest. The legislation we are bringing forward is proof positive of that commitment.

    Tom Tugendhat
    (Tonbridge) (Con)
    I am grateful to my right hon. Friend—forgive me, I should not call him that; he will be embarrassed. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for his point about the steel industry. Understandably, he has chosen to support one particular aspect of the industry, the steelmaker, but at the expense of and to the cost of every other part of the industry—the steel consumers. How will he balance that and what provision will he make for those who will see steel prices rises because of his intervention?

    Peter Kyle
    I have committed to invest in, modernise and protect the steel industry where I need to. Those are watchwords that I apply throughout the economy in highly volatile times. We are investing up to £2.5 billion to modernise and transform the steel sector, from blast furnaces to electric arc furnaces—those are the kinds of transformations we need to make. If I had invested that money but not also protected our sector, that would be pouring vast amounts of public money straight down the drain. In certain circumstances I have had to step in and use measures to protect the domestic British industry. I am not introducing measures for any products that are not manufactured in the UK. I am doing so wisely; I am doing so to protect and ensure that we can build and retain a steel industry that is fit for the future and sustainable.

    We will move forward and ensure that, in an era of global instability, we have the key aspects of our supply chain that we need for our resilience as a nation—yes, in defence; yes, in industry; and yes, in all the money we are investing in infrastructure. We must reserve those capabilities. I am listening and engaging with all parts of the steel sector, and the manufacturers and businesses that depend on it. I am listening closely to them. If there are any impacts, I will of course engage with them to understand and see how it will be possible, where necessary, to provide support.

    Ayoub Khan
    (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
    Will the Secretary of State give way?

    Peter Kyle
    No, I am going to carry on. I appreciate Members’ kind offers to intervene again and again; I look forward to all their speeches.

    The Steel Industry (Nationalisation) Bill will give us the authority to bring British Steel into public ownership, not as an ideological exercise but as a practical means of safeguarding the national interest. It will allow us to retain the Scunthorpe plant as a critical piece of our national infrastructure that is essential to British economic resilience. Britain has long been a proud steelmaking nation. Whatever I have to do to make it so, Britain will retain its capacity and capability to manufacture steel. That is my commitment to Members in this House and to the remaining steel communities of our country. The strength of that commitment can be measured in our determination to boost domestic steel production to ensure that 50% of the steel used here is made here.

    Britain cannot make its way in the world as a services-only economy. We have to make our way—earn our way—to greater prosperity, equality, security and opportunity. We cannot do that by economic isolationism, neoliberalism, greater protectionism or a command economy. We cannot regulate our way to prosperity. We can achieve it only through practical and pragmatic policies that support British businesses to be profitable, to scale up, to create jobs and to grow.

    We have to end the outdated free-market ideologies, failed economic theories and siren voices that all but destroyed Britain’s manufacturing base and drove the British public towards Brexit. Britain’s future prosperity can be built only by business success. There is no other way, no shortcut, no easy option and no magic bullet—no matter how attractive and simplistic slogans and superficial soundbites may appear to some.

    George Freeman
    (Mid Norfolk) (Con)
    The Secretary of State is making a wonderful speech about the 1980s. While I agree with many of his points, the truth is that the country today has come a long way in all sorts of sectors, and I am proud to have done my bit to help that. On regulation, the Secretary of State agrees that leadership on regulating new industries, and having sandboxes and testbeds, is a great UK strength. He also wants us to get closer to the European market; is he worried that if we do, we may end up losing our competitive advantage in a number of areas where we could genuinely attract investment into new industries, such as agri-tech and gene editing?

    Peter Kyle
    To clarify, I am talking about how we recover from the scars of the 1980s, how we learn the lessons, and how we ensure that we never repeat mistakes that cause scars that endure for generations. To answer the hon. Gentleman directly, we will align with the European market only where that is in the national interest.

    We cannot turn back the clock to build future success. The partnerships that this Government have built with businesses, local government and trade unions are delivering resilient growth and helping to build a stronger economy. They are building a fairer country, in which wages are up and public borrowing is down. There have been six interest rates cuts and 500,000 children are being lifted out of poverty. The FTSE 100 has reached historic highs, and the UK is raising more venture capital funding this year than France, Germany and the Netherlands combined.

    This Government faced enormous challenges on taking office, and the conflict in the Gulf presents us with even greater challenges. Despite that, we are making progress. It will take time for the benefits of progress to be sufficiently seen and properly felt. The recent election results show that. The only sure route to proving the benefits of change is growing the economy, and the only certain way to grow the economy is through British business success. Our task is to create the right conditions for Britain’s businesses to invest, succeed, and win in an increasingly competitive global marketplace. We have made a start, and we will see this through to the finish.

  • Jess Brown-Fuller – 2026 Speech on Youth Justice

    Jess Brown-Fuller – 2026 Speech on Youth Justice

    The speech made by Jess Brown-Fuller in the House of Commons on 18 May 2026.

    The Government’s White Paper represents a truly critical opportunity to transform the youth justice system and, importantly, reduce lifetime offending. We know that most offenders in our prisons today are repeat offenders and that persistent offending often begins early in life, with eight in 10 prolific offenders in England and Wales committing their first crime as a child. We must stop this chain of escalation, and the earlier we intervene, the better.

    Nowhere is that more applicable than for children in care, those from ethnic minorities and those with special educational needs, who are disproportionately represented in the justice system. Will the Secretary of State set out how this overhaul will ensure that these children, given their specific vulnerabilities, will receive the targeted support that they desperately need?

    May I take this opportunity to highlight the great work of the organisation SHiFT and encourage the Justice Secretary to engage with it? I believe that SHiFT’s model could be rolled out across the country, helping young people before they even commit their first crime?

    Education for young offenders can be a crucial step in diverting them from a path to reoffending. We are pleased that the Children’s Commissioner will undertake a review of education in young offender institutions, but can the Justice Secretary ensure that it will take into account the fact that 80% of young people who are sentenced have special educational needs and make sure that the support they are getting in those institutes is fit for purpose?

    The Youth Justice Board provides vital independent oversight of the youth justice system, yet the Government have chosen not to act on the report they commissioned from Steve Crocker, instead bringing a number of the board’s functions more directly within the remit of the Ministry of Justice. What is the purpose of those reforms? What benefit will the Government gain from bringing those functions in-house, and will the Justice Secretary address the concerns from across the sector that these reforms risk reducing specialist experience and weakening independent accountability?

    Finally, will the Secretary of State set out how the use of parenting orders will affect the recruitment of foster parents, those being asked to take on special guardianship orders or kinship arrangements, and those considering adoption? If parenting orders will not apply to those families, how will they be supported effectively to ensure that this measure does not lead to further family breakdowns and more children ending up in the care system?

    Mr Lammy

    I am grateful to the hon. Lady for the manner in which she made her remarks. She understands that we have seen this revolving door, where two thirds of children and young people released from custody go on to reoffend, and many of those young people are extremely vulnerable. We have to do something about it.

    I thank her for mentioning the cohort of young people—way too many—who are within the care system. I am very grateful that the Minister responsible for children in care, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), is on the Front Bench today alongside me. He takes a huge interest in the work that our Departments do together to deal with this area.

    The hon. Lady mentioned young people who are adopted. She knows that I am a parent of an adopted child, and I take these issues extremely seriously. She is right, and we are looking in totality at the way in which parenting orders have worked. There must be something going wrong if the number of parenting orders issued has fallen over the last decade from more than 1,000 to just 33 last year. We have to look at it in the round and ensure that judges have the right tools to support parents and guardians over this next period.

    The hon. Lady raises the reforms we are making to the Youth Justice Board. It is still the case, if we look across the country, that there is a postcode lottery. We have to eliminate that postcode lottery, which also exists because of online harms, because of grooming, because of mental health and because of neurodiversity. I was in Feltham recently and I saw the good work that it is doing with young people who are neurodiverse. It is important that the Department, working with our colleagues in the Department for Education and the Department of Health and Social Care, bring some of these powers back to the centre so that we can get coherence across the country and end that postcode lottery.

  • Nick Timothy – 2026 Speech on Youth Justice

    Nick Timothy – 2026 Speech on Youth Justice

    The speech made by Nick Timothy, the Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 18 May 2026.

    It is obvious that we are now in the legacy-hunting stage of this Government. Less a range of exhausted volcanoes, more a row of trampled molehills, Ministers are desperate to be remembered for something. This morning a word cloud was published by the pollsters at More in Common. The public were asked for the Prime Minister’s greatest achievement, and emblazoned across the page, in huge capital letters, was the sad word “Nothing.”

    Today’s announcement, however, is a fitting tribute to the Justice Secretary and his predecessor, the right hon. Member for Birmingham Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood). So desperate are they to find the causes of crime that they sometimes forget that their job is to prevent and punish crime itself. The truth is that Labour just does not have it in its DNA to be tough on crime. The Government have let 60,000 criminals out of jail early, they are abolishing short-term sentences—so that almost all shoplifters and the majority of knife criminals will no longer be sent to prison—and they are pretending that they are doing these things because they have to, but they are doing them because they want to.

    The Prisons Minister says that only a third of prisoners should be locked up. The Minister for Sentencing, the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), says that a pretty big chunk of the overall population should not be in prison, and today’s announcement is more of the same. So I have some specific questions for the Justice Secretary. He wants to increase the age of criminal responsibility to reflect a

    “modern understanding of childhood, vulnerability and development”.

    From smoking bans to voting rights, this Government have a confused view of childhood, so what should be the age of criminal responsibility?

    With a wave of sexual and violent crime committed by illegal immigrants, many of whom pretend to be children, can the Justice Secretary guarantee that those people will not escape justice a second time by giving a fake age to the police? The Government say they will review the function and purpose of criminal courts for child defendants, but the purpose of a criminal court is obvious: to try criminals. Can the Justice Secretary rule out abolishing criminal trials for under-18s?

    The Government also say that they want to end lifelong disclosure requirements for the under-18s. Can the Justice Secretary guarantee that those requirements will still apply to people guilty of violent crimes and to prolific offenders?

    The Government say they will slash custodial remand for young offenders by a quarter, but remand should be used in response to need, not arbitrary targets. What is the Justice Secretary’s alternative? Will he just send criminals home? Will he stick to that target regardless of the level of violent crime and repeat offending?

    The Government want more parenting orders, but this morning the Justice Secretary said that they are not used much at the moment because all judges can do to enforce them is issue a fine. He was unclear on this question. So will Ministers—[Interruption.] The right hon. Gentleman was asked on the radio this morning whether parents who do not comply will face custodial sentences. He fudged that question, so I am asking him to answer it now.

    The figures show that young repeat offenders often start with theft and move on to drug offences and violence, yet the Government’s big idea is to stop punishing swathes of crimes committed by under-18s. The gangs who swarm shops to steal goods in places like Oxford Street, Ilford and Clapham do not need to be put on a course; instead, they need clear punishment, which can include prison.

    The results of soft-touch liberalism are visible in towns and cities up and down the country, yet the changes that the Justice Secretary is announcing today risk amounting to more of the same. This is a big call. If youth crime goes up as a result, it will be on this Government.

  • David Lammy – 2026 Statement on Youth Justice

    David Lammy – 2026 Statement on Youth Justice

    The statement made by David Lammy, the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 18 May 2026.

    With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the youth justice system in England and Wales. I am today publishing a White Paper, with a once-in-a-generation set of reforms to build a youth justice system that intervenes early, responds more effectively and does more to turn young lives around, so that we can better protect the public. I am very grateful to the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), and, before him, my hon. Friend the Member for Scunthorpe (Sir Nicholas Dakin), for all their hard work in getting us to this point.

    Over the past two decades, the number of children entering the youth justice system and being detained in custody has fallen dramatically. This progress is the result of real cross-party consensus, with a modern youth justice system that began under Tony Blair’s Government and was continued, during his time as Prime Minister, by Lord Cameron—he famously said he would “hug a hoodie”—who, with Lord Gove, asked me to carry out the Lammy review.

    But this success has brought a new challenge. Our youth justice system is now working with significantly fewer young people, but they are significantly more vulnerable and at significantly higher risk. Most begin their journey into crime long before they come to the attention of the police, their lives shaped by instability, by trauma and often by neglect—the kind of childhood that most of us in this House could barely imagine. Some grow up surrounded by violence, addiction and abuse, while others are moved endlessly around children’s homes or foster care placements, never staying in one place long enough to have the stability needed to feel safe, let alone the love and care that would enable them to really thrive. All those factors make them more likely to end up in the justice system. When we fail to intervene early enough, the consequences can be devastating—for those children, of course, but also for victims and entire communities, because around 80% of prolific adult offenders first enter the justice system as children.

    The risks that children face have also changed. Today’s children are navigating online harms, criminal grooming through social media and exposure to extremist content. Too often the system has struggled to keep pace: opportunities to intervene are missed, warning signs go unnoticed and agencies do not consistently share information. This means that children can slip through the cracks between services, which risks escalation, and responsibility between agencies becomes blurred. The lessons emerging from the Southport inquiry, following the tragic murders of three young children by Axel Rudakubana, a violent 17-year-old who was known to authorities, are a terrible reminder of what can happen when systems are not sufficiently co-ordinated and not sufficiently decisive in the face of escalating concerns.

    We must learn those lessons but also strike the right balance. The system must recognise that they are still developing and that most have huge capacity to change. We should not over-criminalise but, at the same time, avoiding criminalisation must never mean overlooking risk or failing to act. Benign neglect, however well intentioned, is still neglect. Where behaviour causes harm, timely, proportionate and effective intervention is essential to protect the public and to support children to change course.

    That principle is reflected throughout this White Paper. First, we will intervene earlier, investing an additional £46 million over the next three years in our turnaround programme, which is already showing promising results in diverting children from crime, and by strengthening the join-up with other programmes that support children on the cusp of offending. We will also strengthen and expand the use of parenting orders, which can compel parents to address their child’s behaviour, including attending counselling or guidance sessions. If they do not act, they will face penalties. We will deliver on our manifesto commitment to introduce an offence of child criminal exploitation, building on the work carried out by others, including Baroness May, and placing the focus where it belongs: on the adults who groom, the adults who coerce and the adults who profit from exploiting children. Through new youth diversion orders, we will tackle the increasing number of young people who commit terrorism offences, allowing agencies to intervene before that risk escalates.

    Where offending does happen, we will ensure that children get the right response at the right time. Diversion must be firm, fair and effective. We will fundamentally reform the youth out-of-court resolution framework, to improve consistency and public confidence so that children receive interventions that genuinely address their behaviour and cut crime. We will also pilot problem-solving youth intervention courts, laser-focused on rehabilitation and prevention. They bring together judges, youth workers and specialist support to tackle the root causes of offending, whether mental ill health, school absence, addiction or exploitation, while still demanding accountability from young offenders.

    Custody will always be necessary for the most dangerous offences, but for many children even a short spell inside can deepen their problems, exposing them to more violence and criminal influence. So we are setting an ambition to cut the number of children remanded in custody by 25% over this Parliament, alongside an intention to reduce the use of short custodial sentences, which so often are ineffective, with more than two thirds of children going on to reoffend. Instead, we will invest £5 million in intensive community placements and stronger bail support, protecting the public while giving children a genuine chance to change course.

    We will also reform the childhood criminal records regime, because mistakes made at 13 should not become a life sentence of closed doors and lost chances, not least where this prevents young people from getting a job, which is a crucial factor in helping offenders turn their lives around. We will carefully consider the age of criminal responsibility in this country, which currently sits at just 10 years old, to ensure that it still reflects a modern understanding of childhood, vulnerability and development. We will also strengthen local youth justice services so that they are better equipped to meet the needs of today’s children.

    We will soon set out detailed proposals for a new approach to youth justice service oversight, and funding arrangements so that children receive consistently high-quality support wherever they live. That includes reforming the Youth Justice Board, sharpening its focus on continuous improvement of local services and transferring some of its key functions to the Ministry of Justice, so that Ministers are fully accountable for how the system performs.

    I have been clear that custody will, where appropriate, be necessary for public safety. However, we will take further action to improve safety and education across the youth estate, while setting a clear long-term direction of travel away from large, outdated institutions and towards smaller settings that can better rehabilitate children.

    The White Paper is also about fairness. Not all children in our justice system are equal. Those in care are still far more likely to be drawn into the system. Black children remain vastly over-represented—22% of the youth custodial population, compared with 6% of 10 to 17-year-olds overall. Black children are also over-represented among victims, being around six times more likely to be victims of homicide. I warned about this disproportionality when David Cameron asked me to do the Lammy review, nearly a decade ago, and the fact it persists today should shame us all. These reforms will begin to address that, building a system that is fairer and more consistent.

    It is not a choice between punishment and rehabilitation; it is about what works: protecting the public, cutting reoffending, and stopping vulnerable children—so often victims themselves—becoming tomorrow’s dangerous adult offenders. This Government will do whatever it takes to give more children the chance of a better future, and to keep the British public safe. I commend this statement to the House.

  • Keir Mather – 2026 Speech on the Third Runway at Heathrow Airport

    Keir Mather – 2026 Speech on the Third Runway at Heathrow Airport

    The speech made by Keir Mather, the Minister for Transport, in the House of Commons on 14 May 2026.

    I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to this incredibly important debate, and I thank the Members in attendance, in particular the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) for securing the debate. We have engaged on this topic before, and I would welcome any further engagement in the build-up to and following the publication of the draft amended ANPS.

    Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)

    I am very grateful for the Minister’s commitment to engagement. Right now, there is traffic chaos in the Egham and Pooley Green area. I am opposed to the third runway. It will make the transport situation in the north of my constituency worse, and it will cause problems of increased noise and air pollution. Will he engage with our local communities, so that he can hear from them how much we do not want it?

    Keir Mather

    I would be very pleased to engage with the hon. Member and, perhaps through him, with the community groups that he points to. It is important to say that the ANPS review will consider the elements of the existing ANPS that relate to surface access proposals. That includes mode share targets and measures to minimise and mitigate the effects of expansion on existing surface access arrangements. I would be happy to speak about that with him and his constituents.

    Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)

    The Minister is making a really important point about the importance of surface access. He will know, because I have pressed him on this before, how important I think it is that we get better rail access to Heathrow, regardless of whether there is a third runway. Heathrow has committed to looking at both a western rail link and, importantly for my constituents in Bracknell, a southern rail link. Would he like to see those plans go ahead? Will he press Heathrow to make sure that they are part of any proposals, and will he do everything he can to deliver better rail access for my constituents?

    Keir Mather

    As part of the ANPS process, we are going to consider the Government’s strategic objectives for surface access, including public transport mode share targets. Any expansion at Heathrow will be tested against the public transport mode share targets set out in the ANPS, and rail will form an important part of those considerations. I would be happy to have further conversations with my hon. Friend about how his constituents may be affected by any expansion and mitigations in that space, although I do not wish to pre-empt any of the outcomes of the ANPS review.

    Heathrow expansion and, in turn, a third runway at Heathrow airport would have a transformative impact. It is essential, as hon. Members have outlined, that the Government get this process right, taking full account of all views and ensuring adequate and full scrutiny. The Government recognise that air connectivity plays a vital role in supporting economic growth across the country, with the air transport and aerospace sectors contributing £23 billion to our GDP and 240,000 jobs across the United Kingdom in 2023.

    Dr Ben Spencer

    Will the Minister give way?

    Keir Mather

    I will give way briefly, and then I will make some progress.

    Dr Spencer

    Notwithstanding my points about the third runway, the success of Heathrow is incredibly important to my constituents in providing jobs and economic activity locally. Will the Minister update us on the Government’s response to the concerns about kerosene supply, which impacts Heathrow and our economy?

    Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)

    I hesitate to even raise this, but in case the Minister is anxious about time, we can—fortunately or unfortunately—run to 5.30 pm.

    Keir Mather

    Fortunately, Madam Deputy Speaker—come on!

    The hon. Member is right to say that the economic activity and jobs created by Heathrow airport are dependent on international supply chains, and I know his constituents will be looking with concern at what is happening in the middle east. The Department for Transport is engaging very closely with both our refineries and the aviation sector to ensure we have security of aviation fuel supply. That work is ongoing, and we are confident that, working closely with those stakeholders, we can ensure that the impacts of the crisis in the middle east are sufficiently mitigated. I know how important that will be to his constituents.

    Capacity constraints are hindering further growth in our aviation sector. Heathrow airport, as the UK’s busiest airport and only hub airport, plays a critical role in enabling international connectivity for both passengers and freight: 73% of UK long-haul flights go from Heathrow and 72% of UK international air freight by value goes through the airport. The decision about a third runway at Heathrow has been ducked and delayed for decades, which has resulted in the capacity of the UK’s only hub airport being constrained. That has had a material impact on Heathrow, with the airport operating at over 95% capacity for most of the past two decades.

    Our ambition, as set out by the Chancellor, is clear: it is to enable delivery of an operational third runway at Heathrow by 2035. Better connections and a third runway have the potential to boost the UK economy and support thousands of jobs. Businesses, and business groups such as the Federation of Small Businesses, the British Chambers of Commerce and regional chambers across the country, are clear in their support for Heathrow expansion, as are major trade unions. The Government have been clear that any Heathrow expansion proposal needs to demonstrate that it can contribute to economic growth, be delivered in line with the UK’s legally binding climate change commitments and meet strict environmental requirements on air quality and noise pollution.

    As hon. Members will be aware, last October my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport announced that the ANPS, which is the Government’s policy framework for additional runway capacity at Heathrow airport, would be reviewed to reflect changes in legislation, policy and data, and to ensure that any proposed scheme meets the Government’s four tests—on economic growth, climate change, air quality and noise—for expansion at Heathrow. The ANPS provides the basis for decision making on granting development consent for a new runway. Any scheme must be delivered in line with the UK’s legal, climate and environmental obligations.

    In November, the Government announced that the north-west runway scheme, put forward by Heathrow Airport Ltd, will be used to inform the review of the ANPS. However, once the Government have reviewed the ANPS, and depending on the outcome of the review, any applicant, also known as a promoter, can submit a proposal through the development consent order process.

    It is for scheme promoters to decide when to submit any DCO application for a third runway scheme, and any promoter may submit a proposal for development consent. It is at that stage of the planning process when the precise impact of Heathrow would be considered. Any DCO application to build a third runway would go through a strict and independent process. It would be examined by the Planning Inspectorate. The Secretary of State for Transport would then make a final decision on whether to grant consent.

    Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)

    I am very grateful to the Minister for giving way. He is being very generous with his time—although, as Madam Deputy Speaker pointed out, we have quite a lot of it. The UK Government used to have a golden share in Heathrow airport. However, that was ruled illegal by the European Court of Justice in 2003. Given that the Government broadly want the same thing as any promoter might want, inasmuch as they want Heathrow expansion, that would suggest that the Government are at the point of maximum influence in this build-up phase. Post-Brexit, will the Minister consider making any progress with the third runway conditional on the British Government getting back their golden share, so that we can control a great deal more of what goes on at Heathrow at Government level?

    Keir Mather

    I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. If he does not mind my saying so, I think he may have a slightly over-inflated expectation of my powers as a junior Minister in the Department for Transport to compel a change in Heathrow airport’s ownership structure. What I am pleased to say is that there is broad support for the principle of expansion, irrespective of the fact that the Government have set this as a key priority to generate growth and prosperity in the United Kingdom. I will certainly take his suggestion on board, but I am pleased to say that I think the onus is there to ensure that the project is realised, irrespective of the ownership model that may exist.

    To turn back briefly to the DCO process, the Government are working at pace to ensure that the ANPS constitutes a robust framework under which any successful promoter must meet the four tests and the requirements under the Planning Act 2008—a position we have consistently maintained since the Government’s initial announcement in support of expansion last year.

    I would like to touch on some of the general points raised during the debate on the potential impact of Heathrow expansion, but two small points of detail were originally raised that I would like to address first. First, on the introduction of a civil aviation Bill, the Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill is a Lords Bill and I am pleased to confirm that it was introduced today. Secondly, on the principle of night flights, the hon. Member for Richmond Park will know that the current night flight restrictions at Heathrow are in place until 2028, but we intend to consult next year on proposals for the period that follows.

    Although the ANPS review is ongoing and limits what can be said in detail at this stage, I want to reassure the House that both Parliament and constituents will have the formal opportunity to engage when the amended draft ANPS is published for consultation and undergoes parliamentary scrutiny.

    Heathrow expansion is a private sector project and the Government have been clear that it must be privately financed. Taxpayers will not bear the cost of expansion. The Government are working with the Civil Aviation Authority to ensure that flying out of Heathrow will be affordable and that any increases to fares during expansion are minimised. Protecting the interests of consumers is the CAA’s priority and keeping costs affordable will always be a part of the CAA’s considerations.

    Munira Wilson

    I am very grateful to the Minister for giving way. Just before he got on to the cost point, he confirmed that the ANPS will receive parliamentary scrutiny. Can he clarify for the House whether that means a debate and a vote on the Floor of the House?

    Keir Mather

    I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention. Once the ANPS is laid in Parliament, there is a 21 sitting day consideration period during which the House of Commons can resolve that a vote can be called on whether to approve the ANPS. There is also the important principle of Select Committee scrutiny. It is for the Liaison Committee, I believe, to determine which Committee is most appropriate to take forward Select Committee-level analysis of the implications of the ANPS, and to take oral evidence and so on. That process is all to come and will be folded into a robust process of parliamentary scrutiny that the Government fully support taking place through the Select Committee process.

    It is our view that expansion could inject billions into our economy, support thousands of apprenticeships, and strengthen Heathrow’s status as a global passenger and airfreight hub. It should also deliver major benefits for passengers, including reduced delays and, ultimately, lower fares when compared with a world where Heathrow does not expand. The Government have been clear that any Heathrow expansion needs to demonstrate that it can contribute to economic growth, and as part of the ANPS review the Department is developing analysis on the economic impacts of Heathrow expansion, the outcome of which will be published for consultation alongside the outcome of the ANPS review.

    On the matter of climate commitments, the Government are clear that Heathrow expansion must align with our climate obligations. That is something that the Government remain absolutely committed to. The increasing carbon emissions associated with Heathrow do not in themselves mean that airport expansion cannot take place; the important point is that the Government remain able to meet their carbon reduction targets in the round. Economy-wide net zero and carbon budgets mean that even if emissions rise in one area, such as aviation, they must be fully balanced by either further carbon savings or high-quality and permanent greenhouse gas removals elsewhere.

    The Government published their plan for delivering carbon budgets 4 to 6 on 29 October 2025, including on aviation, and we will be legislating for the carbon budget 7 target shortly. The current ANPS sets expectations on measures to mitigate the carbon impact of expansion at Heathrow, and those mitigations are being considered as part of the ANPS review.

    The hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) mentioned commitments around noise, which are incredibly important. We recognise the concern among communities that a new runway has the potential to cause an increase in noise. The current ANPS provides clear requirements on noise mitigation that any scheme should meet. That includes a scheduled night flight ban of 6.5 hours, between the hours of 11 pm and 7 am, a runway alternation scheme that provides affected communities with predictable periods of respite, and a noise envelope with clear noise performance targets that we will review as part of the ANPS.

    On the two studies that the hon. Member for Twickenham referenced, I can confirm that they will be both be published shortly, and that hon. Members will be able to consider them fully alongside the ANPS process. There will be full transparency on the Government’s work to understand the impact of noise on both her constituents and people who live in proximity of airports across the country. We will consider those and other mitigations as part of the ANPS review.

    On a separate note, Heathrow expansion could also make it easier for aircraft to land without extensive holding patterns, bringing some noise and carbon benefits. The review of the ANPS will consider whether any change is required to the noise impacts and mitigations set out in the original document.

    The Government have consistently made it clear that air quality obligations must be met. The current ANPS sets out clear air quality requirements, and as part of the ongoing review of the ANPS we will consider whether any changes are required to the air quality impacts and mitigation measures contained within it.

    Turning to the important reference that my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) made to surface access, how people get to and from Heathrow airport is vitally important, and will be a key consideration as part of any plans for expansion. Plans must look to mitigate the impact on local and national transport networks. As part of the ANPS review we are considering the Government’s strategic objectives for surface access, including public transport mode share targets and measures to minimise and mitigate the effect of expansion on existing surface access arrangements.

    Any promoter that wants to deliver expansion will need to model the impact of expansion on roads around the airport, including the M25, as part of their application, and consult with National Highways on their plans. As I previously mentioned, Heathrow expansion will be financed through private funding. That includes surface access improvements necessary for the expanded airport, including potential rail links.

    To touch briefly on the matter of parliamentary scrutiny, it is imperative that we listen carefully to everyone’s views on this transformative and landmark piece of infrastructure. Its impact will be felt for decades to come, and it has the potential to unlock significant economic benefits that could be felt across the United Kingdom. However, we fully recognise that there will be communities who have understandable concerns about what this could mean for them, and that is why the Government are launching a formal consultation on the drafted ANPS by the summer.

    Peter Swallow

    I want to push the Minister on mitigations around surface access. This is an opportunity not just to mitigate concerns about existing surface access arrangements, but to massively improve those arrangements. He will be aware that across a large swathe of the south of England, there is effectively no way to get to the airport apart from driving. Through this process we have an opportunity not just to mitigate concerns, but to boost and upgrade public transport networks to get to Heathrow airport.

    Keir Mather

    My hon. Friend makes a fair challenge. He is right to say that the ANPS review and the consultation on it is an opportunity for us to look at some of these questions again and to consider how, with Heathrow continuing to offer its unique opportunity to the United Kingdom’s economy as our only international hub airport, we can facilitate better access for the communities surrounding it, both for the economic opportunities for employment and for people across the United Kingdom to fly and enjoy holidays with their families. He raises an important matter.

    Dr Ben Spencer

    I invite the Minister to Egham as part of his engagement on looking at surface access, where he will be able to see the carnage caused by the level crossings and the benefits of removing the level crossings and having a direct rail link from Egham to Heathrow. While he is there, he will probably also be able to hear the planes overhead and see the impact the noise is already having on that community.

    Keir Mather

    If the hon. Gentleman would like to write to me setting out the terms of his invitation, I would be very grateful and happy to consider them. It would be great to visit his constituency.

    As His Majesty noted yesterday, the Government are bringing forward the civil aviation Bill, which will ensure that the UK’s aviation sector remains competitive, resilient and fair so that it can continue to drive economic growth while delivering better outcomes for passengers. The Bill will also strengthen consumer rights and protections, promote economic growth and infrastructure provision and enhance aviation safety, supporting our world-leading aviation sector to continue thriving for decades to come.

    I thank all Members for their robust scrutiny, both of me and of the measures that underpin our review of the airports national policy statement and the principle of Heathrow expansion overall. On a serious note, I encourage them to engage with us further on these matters. I understand that they have a lot of questions to answer from concerned constituents who want an explanation of how best they can participate in the consultation process for the future of their local communities, so I encourage them to reach out to me. I would be happy to discuss this further to arrange it accordingly. I thank hon. Members for their contributions.