Reeves to announce £15bn for transport outside London ahead of spending review
Rachel Reeves is set to tear up Treasury rules as she announces billions of pounds of investment in public transport in the North and Midlands.
The £15.6 billion package for mayoral authorities is expected to include funding to extend the metros in Tyne and Wear, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, along with a renewed tram network in South Yorkshire and a new mass transit systems in West Yorkshire.
Announcing the investment in a speech in Manchester on Wednesday, the Chancellor will argue that Britain 'cannot rely on a handful of places forging ahead of the rest of the country' and champion a 'new economic model – driven by investment in all parts of the country'.
She is also expected to confirm that next week's spending review will include changes to the rules in the Treasury's Green Book that determine whether projects receive funding.
Green Book rules have been criticised in some quarters for favouring investment in London and the South East, with Labour MP Jeevun Sandher, a member of the Commons Treasury Committee, saying in April it had a 'hardwired London bias'.
Ms Reeves is expected to argue that changing the rules will ensure the Government 'gives every region a fair hearing when it comes to investments'.
But it will also mean more money for areas of the North and Midlands, including the so-called 'Red Wall', where Labour MPs face an electoral challenge from Reform UK.
The investment announced on Wednesday includes £2.4 billion for the West Midlands to fund an extension of the region's metro from Birmingham city centre to the new sports quarter, and £2.1 billion to start building West Yorkshire Mass Transit by 2028.
Greater Manchester will receive £2.5 billion for projects including new tram stops in Bury, Manchester and Oldham and an extension of the tram network to Stockport.
A £1.5 billion investment in South Yorkshire will include £530 million to renew the region's trams, while the East Midlands will receive £2 billion to design a new mass transit system between Derby and Nottingham.
In the south, the West of England will receive £800 million, including £200 million to develop mass transit links between Bristol, Bath, South Gloucestershire and north Somerset.
Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said the announcement 'marks a watershed moment on our journey to improving transport across the North and Midlands – opening up access to jobs, growing the economy and driving up quality of life'.
Some projects being backed on Wednesday, such as the development of a mass transit network in West Yorkshire, formed part of Rishi Sunak's 'Network North' plan intended to compensate for the decision to scrap the HS2 line north of Birmingham.
After coming to power last July, Labour launched a review of those projects, arguing they had not been fully funded.
Wednesday's announcement is the first from the spending review due on June 11 that will set out the Government's day-to-day departmental budgets for the next three years and investment budgets for the next four.
The review is expected to be a difficult one for the Government, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying the Chancellor faces 'unavoidably tough decisions' as the demands of NHS and defence spending raise the prospect of cuts in other departments.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Pembrokeshire Herald
an hour ago
- Pembrokeshire Herald
MP accuses government of rail funding bias as £6.6bn project excludes Wales
David Chadwick calls for rail powers to be devolved to Wales after confirmation East-West Rail brings no funding uplift WELSH Liberal Democrat MP David Chadwick has criticised the UK Government after it confirmed that Wales will receive no additional funding from the £6.6 billion East-West Rail scheme, which runs entirely between Oxford and Cambridge in England. Mr Chadwick uncovered the detail through a written parliamentary question answered by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport, Simon Lightwood. The project has been classified as an 'England and Wales' scheme, despite not including any infrastructure in Wales — a classification that prevents Wales from receiving a proportional share of funding through the Barnett formula. Not happy over rail funding: Liberal Democrat, David Chadwick MP The issue mirrors the controversy over HS2, which was also designated as benefiting both England and Wales, even though the line does not extend into Welsh territory. Independent estimates suggest Wales could have received over £360 million in consequential funding from East-West Rail if it had been classified as 'England only.' Broader estimates indicate that similar misclassifications over the past decade may have cost Wales more than £4 billion in potential funding. In the House of Commons, Mr Chadwick described the decision as 'shocking,' and renewed calls for the devolution of full rail infrastructure powers to the Senedd. He argued that only through devolution can Wales prevent future misallocations and ensure investment in local lines such as the Heart of Wales Line. Speaking after the exchange, Mr Chadwick said: 'It is simply indefensible that Wales continues to be frozen out of hundreds of millions in rail funding for projects that do not lay a single centimetre of track in our country. We saw this with HS2, with Northern Powerhouse Rail, and now again with East-West Rail. Time after time, Wales is left behind.' He added: 'Wales must be able to invest properly in its own rail network. That includes delivering serious improvements to the Heart of Wales Line, which has been neglected for decades. This line is a lifeline for rural communities, supporting jobs, education and tourism, and it deserves the same level of ambition and investment as rail services elsewhere in the UK.' While critics point to a pattern of funding disparities, the UK Government maintains that major rail projects often bring broader economic benefits across the UK, including Wales — for example, through supply chains or job creation. However, Welsh politicians and transport experts have repeatedly argued that these indirect benefits do not match the level of direct investment seen in other parts of the union. The Welsh Government has long advocated for the devolution of rail infrastructure powers, which are currently reserved to Westminster. It has argued that devolution would enable more targeted investment in Wales's underfunded network — a view backed by a growing number of transport economists. Mr Chadwick and the Welsh Liberal Democrats continue to campaign for East-West Rail to be reclassified as an 'England only' scheme and for a fair funding settlement that reflects actual geographic delivery. They are also pressing for urgent investment in rural rail services, particularly the Heart of Wales Line, which connects Swansea to Shrewsbury via mid Wales.
South Wales Argus
an hour ago
- South Wales Argus
Peers debate change to 105-year-old law so children can work on steam trains
Labour's Lord Faulkner of Worcester proposed an amendment to the Employment of Women, Young Persons, and Children Act 1920, which barred children from work in any 'any industrial undertaking', including in mines, construction or transport. If agreed, his change would have exempted voluntary work on heritage railways and tramways from the ban. Government whip Lord Katz cautioned there 'may be unintended consequences' by amending the 'old legislation', but Lord Faulkner indicated he could push for a vote on his proposal before the Employment Rights Bill becomes law. Supporting the proposals, independent crossbench peer the Earl of Clancarty said: 'Steam railways are an important part of this country's heritage, and as every year passes that importance surely grows. 'We are getting closer to a time when there will be no-one with a personal memory of such trains in their working life, so as well as being an enjoyable activity for interested, enthusiastic children and young people, this is also an educational opportunity for the next generation.' Lord Faulkner said the ban was from a 'very different era' and told the Lords it 'languished unknown on the statute book for many years'. He said: 'Heritage railways managers, not surprisingly, do not wish to break the law, even if it is moribund and other safeguards exist.' Training on heritage railways 'has led to many seeking careers on the national rail network and in some cases have provided training and apprenticeships appropriate to their future career choices', Lord Faulkner added. He warned that even where regulators have said they would not prosecute a child who volunteers on a heritage railway, a legal challenge 'could be brought by a local authority or by a relative of a young people, regardless of the assurances given'. Historic England chairman and Conservative peer Lord Mendoza said: 'One of the most difficult things in the heritage sector is to encourage young people to come into it, to learn the skills, to learn the trades that we need in order to keep our heritage environment going for as long as we can.' In his response, Lord Katz said 'regulators should and do take a proportionate approach to enforcement action'. He offered a meeting with peers who wanted to change the law, adding: 'The 1920 Act is old legislation and amendment of it should only be considered after a thorough review upon other areas of law, as there may be unintended consequences.' Withdrawing his amendment to the Employment Rights Bill, Lord Faulkner said he would 'take up the minister's kind offer' but added that without solution, he believed 'the House as a whole would like the opportunity to express its view on the report' as the draft new law progresses.
South Wales Argus
an hour ago
- South Wales Argus
MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation
Liberal Democrat John Milne said there were 'alarming parallels' with the systemic failure which led to the west London tower block fire. Currently there are no laws which specifically govern the safety of battery energy storage systems (Bess), according to the House of Commons library. However, individual batteries could be subject to product safety regulations. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Milne accused the Government of being 'too complacent' as he called for enforceable regulations for the design and construction of the storage systems. The MP for Horsham said: 'The Grenfell disaster was the end result of many failings by both individuals and companies, but at its heart it was a failure of regulation. 'The rules left things wide open for exploitation by cost-cutting developers, and that is exactly what happened. 'Just as with lithium-ion batteries, a new technology, in this case cladding, was being used at scale for the first time without proper understanding of the risks. The time to act is now.' He continued: 'The Government itself has responded to all questions from myself and others to say that it considers the present regulatory regime to be robust. I am tempted to say pride comes before a fall. 'In the last few weeks a Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman has stated that battery fires at storage sites are rare in the UK, we already have high standards in place that require manufacturers and industry to ensure batteries are safe throughout their lifespan. 'This is just too complacent. 'Fires as a result of cladding were also incredibly rare, but that did not save 72 lives at Grenfell.' Grenfell Tower (James Manning/PA) Mr Milne said the industry would benefit from clear guidance, before adding: 'Any guidance needs to cover-off a number of areas, including transport of batteries to the site, design and construction, fire-fighting, ongoing inspection and decommissioning. 'In the short term, if the Government is for any reason still reluctant to regulate, perhaps it could issue clear national guidelines which are capable of being updated annually. 'Enforcement might then take place through the insurance industry, who would be likely to insist that any new applications followed such guidelines, as no project can go ahead without insurance, it is enforcement by the back door. 'Grenfell was a wholly predictable tragedy. A similar fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, which killed six people, should have made us understand the risk, but the warning wasn't heeded and history took its course. 'We can't go back in time to stop Grenfell, but we can act now to avoid making the same mistake again with battery energy storage systems.' Elsewhere in the debate, Conservative MP for Mid Buckinghamshire Greg Smith said there should be minimum distances between battery storage sites and housing. Mr Smith said: 'This is not a debate about the principle of energy storage, although I am in principle opposed to such schemes taking agricultural land and challenging our food security, but today's debate, which is deeply concerning, and what this House must urgently address, are the real, growing, and too often overlooked safety implications of these installations, particularly when placed in close proximity to villages, and rural road networks ill-equipped to support them.' He added: 'At the very least the Government should introduce clear national guidelines on the siting of Bess installations, including minimum separation distances from residential properties, fire resilience standards, mandatory site-specific risk assessments and restrictions on placing these facilities on, or near, rural roads.' SNP MP for Aberdeen North, Kirsty Blackman, said developers should pay towards fire mitigation measures. She said: 'If we're saying to those organisations that are creating the battery storage sites, you will need to pay for the fire safety assessment, you will need to consult the local fire and you will need to pay for the training of those local fire teams in tackling fires at battery energy storage sites, I think that would be the most reasonable way forward. 'Ask them to pay for that training, because it's them that are going to be making a huge profit off it.' Energy minister Miatta Fahnbulleh said: 'It is often claimed that there is no regulation in this sector because there is no specific law addressing battery safety. This is simply untrue. 'The safety and standards of batteries are assured throughout their life cycle. The Government is therefore confident that the safety risks posed by grid-scale batteries are relatively small and well managed.' She added there is 'scope to strengthen' the planning process.
