logo
Infrastructure probe to look at why transport ‘brought to a standstill'

Infrastructure probe to look at why transport ‘brought to a standstill'

Heidi Alexander has said she expects answers in June about why a west London substation fire caused a major power failure at the UK's busiest airport, with more than 270,000 air passenger journeys disrupted on March 21.
At the despatch box, Ms Alexander also took questions about disruption to the Elizabeth, Bakerloo, Jubilee and Northern lines in London on Monday after a fault with the National Grid's transmission network, and why HS2 is 'taking far longer and costing far more to deliver it than anyone expected'.
Liberal Democrat transport spokesman Paul Kohler told the Commons: 'Following a fire at North Hyde substation which closed Heathrow a few weeks ago, various lines on the London Underground were brought to a standstill by another power outage this week.
'It's clear we need to do more to improve the resilience of our transport energy infrastructure, so will the Secretary of State commit to a full review to ensure these incidents do not keep happening?'
Ms Alexander replied: 'There is a review being conducted by Neso (National Energy System Operator) about the Heathrow substation fire. The interim report has been published and we expect the the full report on that in addition – that will be coming in June.
'And we expect the Heathrow report to their board in May. I do work very closely and my department does with all transport operators to ensure that they have robust resilience plans in place, and the Government is conducting a review of critical national infrastructure to address broader questions.'
Neso's 34-page interim review revealed the 'root cause of the fire remains unknown whilst forensic fire investigations are ongoing', and its lines of inquiry ahead of the final report include 'risk management and mitigation, and resilience planning by stakeholders' along with 'incident management coordination by key organisations, at operational and crisis management level'.
According to the National Grid, the fault which affected transport networks in the capital 'was resolved within seconds and did not interrupt supply' but 'a consequent voltage dip may have briefly affected power supplies on the low voltage distribution network in the area'.
Passengers in the arrivals hall at Heathrow Terminal 5 after flights resumed following a blaze that knocked out an electricity substation in Hayes (Maja Smiejkowska/PA)
Conservative former minister Sir Jeremy Wright had earlier raised the construction timeline for the London to Birmingham HS2 railway.
'The Secretary of State knows HS2's central purpose is to deliver economic growth, but she knows too that it's taking far longer and costing far more to deliver it than anyone expected,' he warned.
Sir Jeremy continued: 'Given that projects of the scale of HS2 require parliamentary approval, isn't it important that Parliament has accurate estimates of how much and for how long the project will take to deliver?
'So will she commission a properly independent and thorough review of why it is that the budget for HS2 has increased so often and the timetable has expanded so often?'
Ms Alexander said: 'I will be providing updates to this House on the emerging cost position and opening window. As (he) will know, this Government has appointed a new chief executive of HS2, Mark Wild, and he is conducting an ongoing review.
'We've also reintroduced ministerial oversight, which was so sorely lacking I'm afraid to say under his party's leadership.
An HS2 worker standing in front of tunnel boring machine Karen at the Old Oak Common station box site (Jonathan Brady/PA)
'I recognise this is an important issue and we're doing all that we can do to deliver the rest of this railway for the lowest reasonable cost to the taxpayer so people can enjoy excellent rail services in the future.'
On roads, Jess Brown-Fuller offered Ms Alexander a 'very warm invitation' to visit her Chichester constituency to 'sit in traffic'.
The Liberal Democrat MP said her constituents face congestion 'morning, noon and night on the A27 which is strangling economic growth in the area and preventing investment'.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves last year cancelled the nearby A27 Arundel bypass scheme, which like Chichester lies in West Sussex, after a Treasury audit found £3.5 billion of unfunded pressures related to transport in 2024/25.
Responding to Ms Brown-Fuller, the Transport Secretary said she would 'look at the matters' raised, and added: 'As tempting as (Ms Brown-Fuller's) invitation is, I do regret that I won't be able to do that, and I won't commit the roads minister (Lilian Greenwood) to doing that, either.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

MP urges Government to protect live music venues from new neighbours' complaints
MP urges Government to protect live music venues from new neighbours' complaints

South Wales Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • South Wales Guardian

MP urges Government to protect live music venues from new neighbours' complaints

Dame Caroline Dinenage has proposed letting decision-makers take into account existing properties, when they grant or refuse permission for new projects. The Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee chairwoman warned that 'live music's in crisis, the Government needs to be listening' as she proposed a new clause to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. Dame Caroline, the Conservative MP for Gosport, told the Commons: 'It isn't about venues versus developers. 'It's about making sure we have a balance right between building enough good homes and making sure the places we're building keep the things that make life worth living. 'In Westminster and our constituencies, everyone agrees that our high streets have been in decline, so it's vitally important that we protect the places that are special to us, our constituents and our communities, the places that provide a platform for our creators and our world-beating creative industries where we can make memories, celebrate and have fun.' Dame Caroline called on the Government to let town halls and ministers rule on plans 'subject to such conditions that would promote the integration of the proposed development of land with any existing use of land, including such conditions as may be necessary to mitigate the impact of noise on the proposed development'. A similar principle already exists in national planning rules, known as the National Planning Policy Framework, to ease pressure on existing businesses which 'should not have unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result' of newer builds. But the Music Venue Trust's annual report last year warned that, in 2023, 22.4% of venues closed as a result of 'operational issues', compared with 42.1% of its members reporting 'financial issues'. The Trust identified noise abatement orders or other neighbour disputes as being among the issues which have resulted in permanent closures. 'Consistent application of the 'agent of change' principles will de-risk and speed up planning and development,' Dame Caroline told MPs, and added that her proposal was 'good for venues' and 'good for developers and new neighbours'. She said the law change could help authorities stop 'expensive and often pointless bun fights' when neighbours complain about noise. She continued: 'It'll make sure the needs of an existing cultural venue are considered from the start and it will save developers from late-stage objections and lengthy expensive legal disputes down the line.' Dame Caroline said music venues 'are the foundation of our world-beating creative industries and also very important for our local communities', and that they had been placed 'under threat, including from our disruptive planning system and our onerous licensing regime'. The Commons select committee recommended last year that the 'agent of change' principle should be put on a statutory footing, to protect grassroots music venues.

Smacking ban would be ‘heavy-handed', warns Tory critic at Westminster
Smacking ban would be ‘heavy-handed', warns Tory critic at Westminster

Wales Online

time2 hours ago

  • Wales Online

Smacking ban would be ‘heavy-handed', warns Tory critic at Westminster

Smacking ban would be 'heavy-handed', warns Tory critic at Westminster Speaking in Parliament, former MP Lord Jackson of Peterborough argued "reasonable chastisement" was harmless Introducing a smacking ban in England would be "disproportionate and heavy-handed", a Conservative peer has warned. Speaking in Parliament, former MP Lord Jackson of Peterborough argued "reasonable chastisement" was harmless and calls to abolish it as a defence for punishing a child risked "criminalising good and caring parents, as well as overloading children's services departments". ‌ He made his comments as the House of Lords continued its detailed line-by-line scrutiny of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. ‌ One of the changes proposed to the legislation was a move to outlaw the smacking of a child by scrapping the common law defence of reasonable punishment. Former president of the British Medical Association (BMA) and independent crossbencher Baroness Finlay of Llandaff said children had been left vulnerable by the legal "loophole" and urged for it to be closed, as it had been already in Scotland and Wales. She told peers: "There is clear evidence that physical punishment has no positive outcomes for children." Article continues below She added: "Hitting children hurts on the outside and on the inside. It damages emotional development. "Eight in 10 child runaways cite family violence as a cause." Highlighting support for the proposal by a number of leading organisations, including the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the NSPCC, Barnardo's and the Children's Commissioner for England, Lady Finlay said: "It is time to protect children from assault and battery." ‌ But opposing the amendment, Lord Jackson said: "I believe it is an egregious interference in family life by the state and an intrusion. "It is an attack on family rights and it will encourage a childish disrespect for authority. "It is disproportionate and heavy-handed and it risks criminalising good and caring parents, as well as overloading children's services departments." ‌ He added: "The law as it stands is sensible. It outlaws violence, abuse and unreasonable chastisement. "Crown Prosecution Service guidelines are clear that, if the actions of a parent cause anything that is more than transient or trifling, it is unlawful. "The reasonable-chastisement defence simply permits parents to use very mild physical discipline, like a tap on the hand or a smack on the bottom, without being charged with assault... 'Reasonable chastisement' is common and harmless." ‌ Lord Jackson went on: "Everyone wants the state to intervene to protect children who are in danger of abuse, but, if that is to be done effectively, the limited resources available need to be focused on identifying and helping those at risk, not investigating innocent, loving parents because the law of assault has become politicised by activists who do not agree with reasonable chastisement. "Making trivial smacks a criminal offence will cause misery for parents and children." But the peer faced criticism for his remarks from Liberal Democrat Baroness Walmsley, who said: "He used 'smacking' quite a lot. I will never use that word myself, because it trivialises what we mean. ‌ "We are talking about a hit – about a physical assault on a child. "The reasonable chastisement defence is only ever likely to be used in a court of law, and it has been." She cited the murder of 10-year-old Sara Sharif in 2023, whose father Urfan Sharif claimed in a call to police after fleeing England that he "did legally punish" his daughter but he "beat her up too much". ‌ Pressing for the removal of the "reasonable chastisement" defence, Lady Walmsley said: "The presence of those words in the law sends a message that it can be lawful to beat a little child." Former Playschool presenter and Barnardo's vice-president Baroness Benjamin, who sits as a Liberal Democrat peer, said: "Almost 70 countries have banned smacking, leaving no ambiguity in the law. "It is never OK to 'reasonably punish' a child. It is time to join those countries and end physical punishment against children." ‌ Responding, education minister Baroness Smith of Malvern pointed out the most serious cases of child abuse would not be covered by the reasonable punishment defence. She said: "We are looking closely at changes in Scotland and Wales and continue to build our evidence base, but we do not want to take this important decision yet." The minister added: "Most parents want what is best for their children and they should be supported. Article continues below "It is right that we protect all children who are at risk of harm, but it is also right that we do not intervene in family life when children are safe, loved and well supported."

Why Scotland's public sector needs its own version of DOGE and we should all support it
Why Scotland's public sector needs its own version of DOGE and we should all support it

Scotsman

time3 hours ago

  • Scotsman

Why Scotland's public sector needs its own version of DOGE and we should all support it

Getty Images Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... For those of us who have taken the trouble to engage with Reform UK's personnel and their activities – so we might understand their concerns, ambitions and the motives behind them – the performance of Britain's disruptor party at last Thursday's Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election did not come as a surprise. Labour's victory was a shock because the SNP – and John Swinney in particular – had itself promoted the narrative of a Labour collapse as part of its campaigning tactics. To make this outcome appear especially credible the Labour Party itself had clearly switched into damage limitation mode by protecting its candidate from himself. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In the end the vote delivered a tight three-way contest with only 1471 votes between the Labour, SNP and Reform candidates. With the Conservative candidate coming fourth with 1621 votes, never again should Rusell Findlay suggest voting Reform will result in an SNP victory. That sort of unjustified entitlement will be the death of Conservative or other pro-UK parties when Reform is clearly a serious contender. Let voters decide for themselves on the true merits of a candidate rather than be shepherded to vote against competitors. The prospect now lies ahead that the SNP may not form an administration after next year's Holyrood election and the possibility of genuine change might be possible. Accepting we have a proportional voting system at Holyrood I am not in favour of parties trying to build coalitions before they have been elected because it reduces choice for voters. Let the electorate decide which parties it wishes to reward for good reasons after which the elected representatives can take it from there. I am, however, in favour of parties giving serious consideration to policies that accentuate the common ground they might have with each other so that when attempting to build an administration, be it a full-blooded coalition or a confidence and supply arrangement, it is achieved in a positive and practical manner that makes good government possible. One of the issues that Scotland has to face up to is that it has its spending priorities all wrong. There are very serious faults with the quality and supply of many of our public services and the lack of funds finding their way to where they can make the most difference cannot be solved by taxing or borrowing more. Both of these possibilities are already stretched to the limit – so it requires changing the priorities. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ideas about how this might be done are again up for debate thanks to the election of President Javier Milei of Argentina and President Trump gaining a second term after the Biden hiatus. Both have taken a radical approach of asking hard questions about the justification of spending and making sweeping changes that involve not just trimming budgets but closing down some operations that are now considered to be unnecessary or provide duplication. This has been characterised by Trump's creation of a Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE for short. Now in England, where Reform UK has gained control of five County Councils, local doge projects are being established. In Derbyshire decisions are being taken in quick order to start by example by closing down committees and removing generous sinecures that provide allowances and expenses to councillors. The amounts are initially relatively small but they signal an intent to the public that councillors feathering their nests by establishing talking shops and generating paperchases must end. This can only make the acceptance of rationalising departments and making superfluous posts redundant easier to deliver. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But a word of warning. Making changes at the margins is not going to be enough. Simply cutting back on the number of administrators is not the solution to bad resource allocation. What is required is to accept some functions are not the business of the state, be they delivered by unaccountable quangos and agencies, local councils or legislative governments. Abandoning functions that are not seen as vital necessities will be required. Scotland undoubtedly needs its own form of DOGE to go through the lush spending of the Scottish Parliament – all while the homeless are without shelter, drug-dependents are without rehab, classrooms are without teachers, pregnant women are without maternity wards and convicted criminals are released because we are without enough prisons. The place to begin is to take more seriously the insightful reports of the Auditor General who reveals with disturbing regularity the poor decisions that have been taken which cost us millions. When we add millions together we get closer to saving billions – all of which can be used to reduce Scotland's taxes to at least the same level as England's so we can encourage the enterprise that will create genuine sustainable prosperity. By stripping the SNP's unnecessary spending vital services can be protected and improved. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It also needs a huge change in attitude – and it must start at the top. We need a Scottish Government to always think about the public pound when committing to defend its policies through the courts. The fact that defending the Scottish Government case in the Supreme Court regarding what constitutes a woman should have run up a bill of £170,000 should be universally condemned. The legal costs that started with Nicola Sturgeon and passed through the hands of Humza Yousaf and John Swinney should be paid by them. It was, after all, an action designed to save their political reputations and against at least half of Scotland's people. Likewise, any spending on the whole panoply of independence and grievance mongering or political hobbyhorses should be open to challenge. The turnaround of the Argentinian economy has led the once-defaulting basket-case economy to higher GDP growth, falling inflation and improving and a declining poverty rate. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Scotland has a great deal to do to correct 18 years of SNP misrule all the more reason that being more realistic about what can be afforded must be as starting point.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store