Regional Transport Inequality

Thursday 11th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call Catherine Atkinson, who will speak for about 15 minutes.

13:23

[Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered regional transport inequality.

I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate. It was originally due to take place on the first day back from the summer recess, but there was not time because so many people wanted to speak. I am grateful to those in attendance today.

The importance of transport is completely understandable. Whether for travel to work and to healthcare appointments, meeting family and friends, or getting goods to the businesses that need them, transport keeps our country running, keeps life moving and keeps us all connected. This Labour Government are committed to opening up opportunities across our country, so it is important to address the historic and long-standing inequalities between regions when it comes to transport.

Those of us who had the chance to go on holiday in the UK during our hot summer, which already seems quite a long time ago, have returned better acquainted with the transport infrastructure in each other’s constituencies—those who heard, “Are we there yet?” on repeat from the back seat are perhaps too acquainted. One of the benefits of being on the Transport Committee —as well as having esteemed colleagues, a number of whom are here today—is that every trip can be an unofficial fact-finding trip. We can compare, sometimes enviously, the newest tram extension, charging network or bus lane.

Colleagues across the country are advocating for transport projects their constituencies. When we are successful in securing transport investment, that change brings people together, cuts costs for our businesses and allows people to access new opportunities, but when transport breaks down or gets cut, constituents suffer the consequences, often daily. One example in my constituency is the Darley Abbey Mills bridge, which was found to be unsafe and was shut, leaving people and businesses cut off and isolated. A temporary bridge was put in three years ago, but thanks to the new East Midlands Mayor, Claire Ward, funding has been secured to progress towards a business case for building a permanent bridge.

One of the reasons that I was so keen to be on the Transport Committee was that transport is essential to economic growth and decarbonisation. The connectivity that transport brings is equally important up and down the country, but the amount of investment that regions get for transport has historically been miles apart. Transport is the most unequally distributed of areas of spending, including education and health.

There are many colleagues here from the east midlands, which has the lowest transport expenditure per head of all the regions and nations in the United Kingdom. In 2023-24, it was £368 per person—just a quarter of the amount for London, and about half the average for England. If the east midlands had been allocated the UK average in the five years between 2019 and 2024, we would have received an additional £10 billion. To ensure prosperity reaches all corners of our country, more equal investment is vital, so I welcome the direction of travel in the spending review, including the £15.6 billion of investment in local transport projects for England’s city regions over the next five years—more than double the previous capital spending rates. That includes £2 billion of funding secured by our excellent East Midlands Mayor, Claire Ward.

For years, there have been concerns that the UK Green Book—the Treasury’s official guidance for appraising public investments—is skewing how areas of need are identified. There has been an over-concentration of investment in high-GDP areas, neglecting the potential of other regions, which creates a vicious cycle. I welcome the Chancellor’s review, and I look forward to the new Green Book next year.

To secure the transformational change that we need, this Labour Government are investing in areas that have been neglected and forgotten. Speaking of neglect, when it comes to potholes and the need to better maintain and improve our roads, this Government have increased capital funding to £24 billion over three years. That is particularly important for Derbyshire, which, according to the RAC, had the worst potholes in the country. With the better buses Bill, the Government have recognised the importance of bus travel.

[Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent introductory speech on regional inequalities in transport. Buses are incredibly important in my constituency, and they need not only investment but support. Newcastle is yet to receive real-time bus information of the type that has been enjoyed in London for more than a decade, which makes transport more reliable and therefore more used. Does she agree that we need to ensure that the technology that supports these important services is also more equally distributed across the country?

[Catherine Atkinson]

I think we can all agree that the better the technology and the real-time information that is needed, the more people will be encouraged to use our buses. We absolutely need to encourage more people to use our buses. Over the 15 years up to 2023, we saw a massive loss of bus services. Where the cuts hit has varied, but hardest hit was the east midlands region where we lost 60% of our bus services. The Transport Committee highlighted that decline in our report on buses that was published over the summer. We must not forget on whom bus investment impacts the most: the young, the elderly, those on low incomes and the disabled.

Hon. Members will be shocked that I have got this far into my speech without mentioning trains, because I talk about rail quite a lot, which is entirely understandable as a Derby MP. Derby will be the home of Great British Railways. It is the city at the centre of the largest cluster of rail companies in Europe, and arguably globally. It is the city that a few weeks ago hosted the Greatest Gathering—the world’s largest ever gathering of historical and modern rail vehicles, which was described as a “Glastonbury for trains”—to celebrate the 200th anniversary of the modern railway. However, despite this rich rail heritage in the region, there are just over 100 rail stations for 5 million people. The region has the lowest proportion of people living within a 15 to 20-minute walk of a rail station in England, and about three quarters of those stations are served by just one train or fewer per hour. The capital of rail will be the region with the lowest train station usage per head in England.

Our midlands main line that runs through the east midlands is the only main line route in England that is not yet fully electrified. It is electrified to Wigston, south of Leicester. East Midlands Railway will be putting on new bi-mode trains by the end of the year, so those living alongside the route up to Wigston will benefit and the 9 million passengers who use the line will get that far using electrified tracks. After Wigston, however, the trains will revert to diesel, and the rest of the densely populated line will continue to be exposed to more noise and tens of thousands of tonnes of CO₂ every year. Hundreds of people have written to me supporting the call for electrification.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend mentions that constituents have written to her, but does she acknowledge that in addition more than 30 MPs have been working together to advocate for electrification, because of the great benefits she has described?

[Catherine Atkinson]

I am grateful for the support that my hon. Friend, alongside many colleagues, has shown for electrification and the benefits that it can bring. It would be a fitting celebration of 200 years of the modern railway to continue the electrification of the midland main line, which would bring jobs, skills and hundreds of millions of pounds in economic benefits particularly to the east midlands.

I love my region, and like so many in this Chamber I know my region’s strengths and can imagine the possibilities if investment were genuinely equitably distributed around our country. If our regional transport was more equal, it would create more prosperity, economic growth, social equality, regional development and carbon reduction as well as better air quality. Our transport infrastructure is the country’s circulatory system: it connects and enriches wherever it reaches. If someone’s circulation is not great, they feel the cold a little more in their fingers, as I well know. If it is restricted more, their arms and legs get fatigue, numbness and pain. In the extreme, it eventually leads to organ failure. That is where we had been heading for far too long, but over the last year the Government have been getting the blood pumping again.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Catherine Atkinson]

I am just about to finish.

If the UK is a body, Derby is geographically at its heart and is asking to have the same chance as everywhere else to be connected. We need to maintain our change of direction to reduce the inequality in the spend per person on transport, stay on track towards the reduction, and ultimately the elimination, of regional transport inequality, and deliver fair funding for transport.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

Order. There is an immediate four-minute time limit.

13:36

[Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)]

In just one year, this Labour Government have already failed rural Britain on transport. They have scrapped the £2 bus fare cap, pushing up costs for working people; they have wasted £250 million in the process of nationalising South Western Railway, while my commuters are still stuck with cancelled peak services; and they continue to pour billions of pounds into London, while communities such as Farnham, Bordon, Haslemere and Liphook in my constituency are left behind. My constituency is just 40 miles from London, yet the difference in connectivity is stark. London enjoys a world-class system—well, when it is not being held to ransom by greedy tube driver unions, as is the case this week—but Farnham, Haslemere, Bordon and Liphook are treated very differently.

The contrast with London is outrageous. In the capital, there is a bus stop every 400 metres and services run every five to 10 minutes throughout the night. In my constituency, buses are 30 to 90 minutes apart, if they run at all, and many disappear entirely after 7 pm. Students at the University for the Creative Arts in Farnham cannot get to Guildford in the evening. Meanwhile, Londoners can choose from over 100 night bus routes. Whereas passengers in London pay a fixed £1.75 fare, people in rural Surrey and Hampshire pay much more, because Labour hiked the cap.

My constituents will remember that Labour put up their fares, which is why I took action. I convened the Bordon taskforce to bring Stagecoach, local councils and local leaders around the table, and the results speak for themselves. The newly revised No. 18 bus service now runs every 30 minutes on weekdays and Saturdays, and hourly on Sundays, linking Bordon, Whitehill, Farnham and Aldershot. The No. 13 service between Bordon, Alton and Basingstoke has also been strengthened, with six Sunday return journeys. Stagecoach even trialled free travel this June after my push for better value. These are tangible improvements that make life easier for thousands of people, but gaps still remain.

It is extraordinary that there is no bus connection between Bordon and Petersfield—only 11 miles apart—except for a single school service. That is why I am in talks with East Hampshire district council to establish a new route, modelled on the Waverley “hospital hoppa”—a scheme for which I secured funding in Farnham.

[Joe Robertson]

I agree with the points that my hon. Friend’s is making. The train to my constituency runs through his constituency, and he has referred to it already. Unfortunately, my constituency is reliant on entirely privatised ferry companies in order for us to get there. Does he agree that if this Government’s outlook on transport is to be truly integrated, they need to connect all parts of the United Kingdom and stop focusing only on cities?

[Gregory Stafford]

My hon. Friend makes a powerful and important point. He is absolutely right: this Government are focused on metropolitan areas, and constituencies like his and mine, which are rural and semi- rural, are simply left behind. His mention of rail neatly brings me to my points on rail.

Rail tells the same story as buses. Three of my four major towns have train stations, but Bordon, the third largest one, has none, and the lines that do exist are fragmented and unreliable. Only this week, the 7.28 from Farnham to Waterloo was cancelled. Too often, peak-time trains arrive at Haslemere or Liphook with just four coaches. When I challenged South Western Railway on that, I was told that to avoid cancellations nearer London, it reassigned carriages away from my area. I made it clear: my commuters are not second-class citizens, and that needs to change. At South Western’s Farnham depot this summer, I pressed the company directly on the £250 million Arterio fleet, which is meant to relieve overcrowding but is still sitting idle for want of drivers or because of faults. I secured assurances of change, and I will now hold the company to account.

Meanwhile, as I mentioned, the Government wasted £250 million nationalising South Western Railway. That money could have delivered a permanent Bordon-to-Liphook bus link for 1,000 years. Instead, urban areas get Crossrail and trams, while my constituents get cancellations and four-carriage trains. That is clearly not acceptable. Much more help is needed for my constituents. Rural communities such as mine cannot keep being treated as second class. Levelling up, economic growth and net zero—all laudable aims—mean nothing if millions of people in my constituency and the surrounding areas cannot get a bus on a Sunday, or a train with more than four carriages on a Monday morning. That is the reality of Labour’s transport policy: higher fares, wasted money and broken promises. That is unacceptable to my constituents and, I hope, unacceptable to the constituents of every single Member of this House.

13:41

[Mrs Elsie Blundell (Heywood and Middleton North) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this crucial debate.

High-quality, reliable and integrated public transport is often the difference between communities getting ahead or being left behind. Whether that is young people being able to realise their aspirations, older people receiving the healthcare they need, or working people getting home safely after a night shift, those issues not only have practical consequences if left unaddressed but erode trust between our constituents and the Governments they elect.

Lack of transport connectivity impedes the progress that people need and deserve to see in their communities. If we do not fix that, we make it easier for those who turn to pessimistic narratives to talk our country down. Our constituents deserve so much more. The disparity in transport investment between north and south is the result of a model that is built from the top down and the centre out, a model that has at its heart an orthodoxy that is ill-suited to the needs of passengers today, and a model I am proud to say this Government, in partnership with our regional mayors, are beginning to dismantle.

From a much-needed review of the Green Book to increased capital spending in Greater Manchester and other city regions, from the introduction of integrated settlements for combined authorities and a modern industrial strategy to the transformative English devolution Bill, those are all reasons I am proud to be a Greater Manchester Labour parliamentarian. We have a pioneering transport network, where powers devolved nationally are seen and felt on the ground.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend talks about being a Greater Manchester MP, and Newcastle-under-Lyme and our part of Staffordshire are not too far away. I wonder whether she would support my calls for a direct train line from Stoke-on-Trent station to Manchester airport, which would unlock growth and cut costs for families, in particular those seeking to travel. More importantly, it would put our part of the world on the map.

[Mrs Blundell]

I am sure that is something the Transport Minister has listened to and is looking at.

Greater Manchester has set the agenda when it comes to the promise and opportunity that devolution can galvanise. Through the development and expansion of the Bee Network—an integrated transport system through low fares and simplified ticketing, and an enhanced bus and Metrolink network with plans to integrate heavy rail lines in the future—the Bee Network’s utility goes far beyond getting people from A to B; it is a conduit for employment opportunities, house building and a thriving regional economy. Indeed, Greater Manchester’s productivity growth measured by gross value added in the past decade has outstripped that of every other region, including London. Transport has been central to making that happen.

Despite real success, however, we cannot take future progress for granted. Greater Manchester and other city regions remain just as deserving of our backing today, to ensure that we do not scupper economic growth in the region. We must ensure that the significant projects are moving forward swiftly and efficiently to give people hope for a more connected future, and that includes the trans-Pennine route upgrade and the Manchester-to-Liverpool rail enhancement. Getting that right is integral to transforming public transport and creating networks predicated finally on the needs of local people, rather than on the paternalism of the centre.

My constituents can speak with some experience on this. For decades, passengers living in Heywood and Middleton have been a mere afterthought, with no rail connectivity into Manchester city centre, despite being just a few miles away; bus services that do not align with the lives and aspirations of local people; and an incredibly congested road network.

In the one year that I have been the proud Member of Parliament for Heywood and Middleton North, with central Government working in lockstep with our combined authority, we have secured funding to ensure that the tram will now connect Heywood to Manchester city centre. That is thanks to the £2.5 billion of funding allocated to Greater Manchester by our Labour Chancellor in the form of transport for city regions funding, enabling the mayor and his team to plan for the longer term. It also means that local leaders, in concert with the combined authority, are working to deliver a mayoral development corporation in Middleton, with the strong possibility of a new Metrolink service there too.

This is the difference that devolution can make, and in Greater Manchester we have shown what we are capable of. But we cannot be complacent. Expertise in town and transport planning must be further developed in our regions, and our bank of knowledge must deepen. Funding cycles should become yet more assured across the country, enabling our local and regional leaders to have the confidence to innovate. Fundamentally, we must formalise and codify engagement between the Department and mayoralties, and not just ahead of a fiscal event but consistently, so that we can build robust transport networks that support the needs of local people.

Regional transport inequalities do not have to spell out a foregone conclusion; we just need to find the political conviction to confront them. Each town, city and village has within it people who are capable of reaching the sum of their ambitions. We just need to be unrelenting in building the transport system to get them there.

12:34

[Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)]

I would like to highlight the deep inequalities in transport spending across our country and to speak specifically about the railways in the south-west. Per head of population, our region receives significantly less investment in transport than the average. In fact, the south-west region receives the second lowest funding in the country after the east midlands, as we heard from the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson)—only we do not have the prospect of electrification to look forward to on our main line, probably ever.

According to the House of Commons Library, transport spending in 2023-24 was £429 per person in the south-west, compared with £1,313 per person in London, £729 in the north-west and £706 in the west midlands. That is not levelling up; it is levelling down. This matters on a daily basis for my constituents in Newton Abbot and for communities across Devon and the south-west. Our transport links are essential to our economy, tourism, trade and everyday life, but all too often they are neglected.

We all remember when storms tore through our sea wall at Dawlish in 2014, cutting the south-west off from the rest of the country. The cliffs blocked the line for eight weeks, costing the south-west economy some £1.2 billion. The Dawlish rail resilience programme was split into five phases, with the last being the most critical. That vital phase has not been funded. The Government have rejected all solutions put forward by Network Rail so far, and now we do not even have the funding to develop an acceptable alternative. Every winter storm puts our connection with the rest of the UK at risk, and the Government are not taking this seriously. I urge the Government to give Network Rail the parameters they will accept and clear funding to design a solution. Lack of a solution could cost another £1.2 billion if, or when, the cliffs fail again.

Accessibility is another area where we are falling short. Too many railway stations in the south-west still lack step-free access. I would particularly like to see better access at Teignmouth station. Disabled passengers are forced to choose their journeys based not on where they want to go but on which stations they are able to use. That is not acceptable in this day and age.

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

My hon. Friend rightly draws attention to Teignmouth station. Despite its large size, my constituency does not have a single mainline train station, but our closest station, Bodmin Parkway, also has severe accessibility challenges. It has been put on the list for accessibility upgrades, but that could happen as late as 2032. Will he join me in calling on the Minister to make those upgrades as quickly as possible, so that our constituents do not miss out?

[Martin Wrigley]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend.

When we had the railway station defences rebuilt at Dawlish, we did get the benefit of a lift. Teignmouth still does not have that. Before the lift was put in, disabled passengers were put on what is called a barrow crossing—they were literally put on a trolley and wheeled across the railway lines. That is just not acceptable.

I say this clearly: the south-west deserves its fair share. We need fairer transport spending, proper disabled access at every station and a full commitment to complete the resilience work that will protect our region’s lifeline rail route. I will keep pressing the House and this Government until the south-west gets the fair share it deserves.

13:50

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

I am incredibly grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for bringing forward this important debate. She spoke with passion about the subject.

The south-east can be described as leafy and rich, with Kent being the garden of England, but parts of that garden have been left unnurtured, untended and left behind. Transport inequality can be framed as a north-south divide. In my constituency, there is a north-south divide where people living in the north of the constituency have a lower life expectancy of over a decade. But both the urban and rural communities have been left behind.

When I spoke with young people during the campaign and more recently, they told me that transport is their No. 1 issue. It is about connectivity and getting across Gravesham, because there are no buses on a Sunday that can take them to town to meet their friends, and there are no buses that can take them after school if they want to stay and do extracurricular activities. A mum recently contacted me about her 16-year-old who was excited to start at Northfleet technology college, which specialises in engineering. They chose that college because of the bus route, the 305, but that has now been scrapped. We see this up and down our country: bus routes are there one day and scrapped the next. The new bus route means nearly an hour’s journey with a 20-minute walk. On top of that, a pass costs £640 for that privilege. The Kent freedom pass, which is run by Kent county council—previously Tory but now Reform-led—used to cost £50. Now it is over £550 a year and rising.

Families are being priced out, and although I helped to secure options to pay in monthly instalments, the cost remains out of reach for many. In urban areas of my constituency, reliability is a major concern. The cliff collapse at Galley Hill in the neighbouring constituency is having a major impact on the reliability of buses.

Under the Tories’ Ebbsfleet Development Corporation, millions of pounds have gone to shiny, fast-track routes. However, they serve the new developments while existing communities have lost their services altogether. The people of Northfleet lost their bus route. They were promised a physical connection between Northfleet station and Ebbsfleet International—a place that has some of the highest levels of deprivation—but that has been placed on hold indefinitely, meaning that new housing developments see that investment while those who really could do with that opportunity have been left behind. That is a two-tier public transport system, and it is not fair.

In Gravesham we see bus companies competing in a relatively small area for similar routes, undercutting each other and making timetable choices based on profit, not where people actually want to go. I am incredibly confident that the new bus services Bill will enable local people to make the routes better for themselves.

I must mention the ferry—bring back the Tilbury-Gravesend ferry—because it is not only about getting across the borough but getting to Essex, supporting our businesses as a place for growth.

[Joe Robertson]

The hon. Member mentions ferries. Perhaps she will show a little sympathy to me and my constituents, because we are entirely reliant on ferries that are unregulated and privatised, so neither the local authority nor the Government have any say over those services, whereas her local authority does have a say over her ferries. She might want to reflect on the role of Government in all modes of transport across the UK.

[Dr Sullivan]

The hon. Member and I share a passion for ferries. My ferry no longer runs, so despite having a local government agency that could intervene and supply a ferry, it let go of that contract. I will continue to bang that drum, because ferries are an incredibly important mode of transport for so many people, especially his constituents on the Isle of Wight.

The Government want to see transport as a gateway to opportunity, which I fully support, not the barrier that it is today and has been for many years. We must unleash community power and agency to bring voice to the people of Gravesham, especially the young people, who deserve the right to opportunity via buses and boats.

13:55

[Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for introducing this really important debate. In my maiden speech over a year ago, in a railways debate, I spoke about the state of the railways in my constituency and the need to open a station—Devizes Gateway—to bring back a service to the town lost since the days of Beeching. Despite efforts in the name of levelling up, any progress made to tackle regional inequality in transport has been modest and inconsistent. I represent many small towns and villages that rarely benefit from national policy initiatives and all too often have to rely on private cars to travel longer distances to services, schools and jobs.

A more equal distribution of transport funds could drastically improve the lives of people in my constituency, and thousands of others up and down the country. One academic study found that a fifth of workers had turned down a job because of poor bus services. Another found that 40% of those looking for a job said that the lack of personal transport or inadequate public transport were key barriers to their getting a job.

Wiltshire is in a challenging position when it comes to rail travel. We have railways, but many do not benefit from the services, which all too often carry people and freight across the county but do not stop at the few stations in the county. Local services range from unreliable to non-existent. Nowhere is that mismatch felt more strongly than in Devizes, a town at the geographical and cultural heart of Wiltshire, with its historic centre, independent businesses and nearby world heritage sites. The town’s marketplace stands just two and a half miles from a major railway line, but in order to access the network passengers must travel by road 12 miles to Chippenham or 23 miles to Swindon. Melksham, a fast-growing industrial town, fares little better. With only one train every two hours during most of the day, locals cannot rely on it for work and school and many are not even aware of it.

Major improvements to Wiltshire’s rail services can be made with only minor infrastructure upgrades. Network Rail’s 2024 Wiltshire rail strategy sets out the compelling case for building the Devizes Gateway station, reconnecting 30,000 people living in and around the town to the railway and bringing more visitors to that special part of Wiltshire.

I am also delighted to be supporting the Bath and Wiltshire metro proposal, which would deliver many of the improvements we need locally, including for Melksham. A group of industry experts is meeting in Bath as I speak, to discuss how we can leverage existing infrastructure to regenerate our communities. Where good transport leads, high-quality housing, jobs and economic opportunity will follow.

The Secretary of State offered kind and encouraging words in Transport questions this morning. However, following the meeting in Bath today, it would be enormously useful if the Rail Minister would agree to a meeting with me and the participants.

13:58

[Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)]

For rural areas such as South Norfolk, transport links are a lifeline. So I am delighted that this Government are doing what previous Governments failed to do: investing in South Norfolk’s infrastructure. Already I have secured a £200 million investment to upgrade the Thickthorn junction, shaving valuable, lifesaving minutes off journeys for ambulances to access the Norfolk and Norwich hospital, which will also benefit the constituency of the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) directly. I have also secured £2.6 million for key cycle and footpath access across Norfolk, including the Hethersett to Norwich research park cycle route. But there is more to do.

Today I want to touch on three points: first, rural road safety; secondly, bus services in South Norfolk; and thirdly—the Minister will not be surprised to hear me mention this again—Wymondham train station.

On my first point, I am currently running a constituency-wide survey on rural road safety in South Norfolk. Once the survey has concluded, I will share my findings with Norfolk county council, the police and crime commissioner for Norfolk and the Roads Minister. What is already clear, however, is that Norfolk roads are simply not fit for purpose. They are unsafe and covered with potholes, despite our Labour Government increasing Norfolk county council’s budget for pothole repairs to £56 million.

On bus services, the situation is just as frustrating. For disabled and less mobile residents of estates like the Hampdens in Costessey, bus services are in effect non-existent. The whole of the Hampdens estate is without bus services—they deserve better than this enforced isolation.

I now turn to Wymondham train station. As the Department already knows from my many, many lobbying attempts, platform 2 southbound from Wymondham has no step-free access—it is a Victorian train station that is celebrating its 180th birthday—so anyone with a mobility issue wanting to travel south from Wymondham must first travel all the way north to Norwich, then turn around and travel all the way back down. That is completely inefficient, isolating and unjust.

Once again, the primary victims of poor transport provision are elderly and disabled people. Accessibility upgrades to Wymondham station are being considered by the Access for All scheme. I realise that the Minister will not be able to comment in any detail about Wymondham station, but I can think of no better way to prove the Government’s dedication to tackle regional transport inequality than to make it accessible for all.

Viewers of the BBC’s “Politics East” would expect all politicians from East Anglia to want to talk about another aspect of rail use: the Ely and Haughley junction upgrade. I will continue to lobby on this cross-party issue across the whole of East Anglia. The upgrade would shave off valuable minutes and increase freight haulage to Felixstowe, which would be a huge economic boost for our region, and I would get more services to Wymondham and Spooner Row, which would be a win for everyone. Again, I put that on the Minister’s to-do list.

To sum up: we need to hold Norfolk county council to account for failing to fix our roads, we need to continue making progress to improve access to bus services, and Wymondham station must finally be made accessible to all.

14:02

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

As the co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on heritage rail, I must start by noting that we are celebrating Railway 200 on 27 September.

The railways brought wealth, new ideas and vitality to communities across the UK. They were and are the vehicle of growth. Our many heritage railways, including 10 in my constituency, continue to marry technologies old and new, and to bring so much happiness to so many people, but the great little trains of Wales are now charitable or private railways. Wales’s public rail network has been the last stop on the line for investment: a legacy that continues to impact the lives of people and communities across our nation. The Network Rail Wales route, which accounts for 11% of the UK’s rail network, received—wait for it—1% of the enhancement budget between 2011 and 2016.

The Welsh Government previously estimated that Wales could be missing out on up to £8 billion in rail investment between 2001 and 2029; hon. Members will note that that spans a number of Governments here in Westminster. The funding deficit leads to inadequate public transport infrastructure, which has far-reaching consequences, particularly for those who have no access to cars and those who live in post-industrial and rural areas. It limits people’s ability to connect with friends and family and creates barriers to accessing education and employment opportunities.

In Wales, we want to improve our productivity, and we want the means to do it. The spring statement in June offered only a token gesture towards addressing the deep-rooted funding disparities that Wales faces. For example, the Government’s suggestion that the £445 million of rail investment—over 10 years—will compensate for the historical underfunding of the Welsh network or the multibillion-pound injustice of Wales’s exclusion from HS2 funding is simply not credible. Where are the reinforcements against climate change? Where is the electrification of our lines?

Let us not forget that the current Secretary of State for Wales acknowledged in opposition that Wales’s fair share from HS2 should be at least £4.6 billion—so we have received a tenth of what our own Welsh Secretary of State once felt was fair. The spring statement also included the Government’s review of the Green Book, aimed at improving investment outside London and the south-east of England. Yet on examining its contents, I was disappointed but not surprised to find no commitment to reforming the way in which Welsh rail is funded. This inequality remains unaddressed.

The Government’s decision to classify the Oxford to Cambridge railway as a project that benefits Wales is a stark example of the kind of accounting manipulation—massaging—that deprives Wales of rightful Barnett consequential funding, just as we saw with HS2 under the Conservatives. Indeed, earlier this year, the Secretary of State for Wales acknowledged in writing that Welsh rail has suffered significant under-investment. Yet there has been no pledge to bring spending in Wales in line with per capita investment levels in England.

I urge the Government to move beyond rhetoric and take decisive action. Let us begin by devolving powers over heavy rail to Wales, ending the ability for the outdated Barnett funding formula to be manipulated to Wales’s detriment while also granting Wales meaningful control over rail transport investment, just as Scotland and Northern Ireland already have.

14:05

[Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) (Lab)]

I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak in a really important debate on regional transport inequality. For too long, communities in the north-east have suffered the effects of chronic underinvestment in transport and the flawed legacy of privatisation. What should be a public service has instead become a patchwork system that too often fails local people.

On the railways, the proposed LNER timetable risks cutting vital stops at Durham. For many that would mean unnecessary changes at York or Newcastle. For older people, disabled passengers and those travelling with children, that creates real barriers and makes our railways less accessible at a time when they should be opening up.

Buses tell a similar story. In Brandon, Ushaw Moor, Waterhouses and Newton Hall, people depend on services from Arriva and Go North East, yet complaints reach my inbox every week. The X20 from Langley Park to Sunderland and the 43 from Esh Winning to Durham are both unreliable, and in some villages buses simply do not run at all on Sundays or bank holidays. Too often, our area is left with the oldest buses, prone to breaking down, while the newest vehicles serve the routes in Newcastle and Sunderland. Although funding for new bus stops is welcome, my constituents ask what good they are when the services to go with them are not reliable.

There are workforce challenges too. A shortage of engineers causes delays, when our further education colleges could be supported to provide apprenticeships and skills. Locating a depot in Consett, where bad weather frequently disrupts operations, has only added to problems. Another issue is that our drivers in the region are paid less than colleagues in the north-west by the exact same companies—hardly a recipe for recruitment or retention.

All that reflects the wider picture of years of underinvestment and inequality. Had the north received the same per person transport spending as London since 2009, we would have had £140 billion more—enough to transform the system. Instead, nearly a fifth of rural bus routes have vanished in just five years, deepening isolation for many.

[Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that there is nothing more isolating than not being able to get somewhere? My constituent Elishia Ingham tried to get her mobility scooter on to a bus service but was rejected entry on to the bus because there was not enough space. Does my hon. Friend agree that even though bus companies do not have to allow that by law, they might increasingly consider the needs of disabled travellers?

[Mary Kelly Foy]

I could not agree more. Although we may improve our bus services and the types of modern buses we have, they are not accessible in all areas, and that is a huge inequality.

The Government’s Bus Services (No. 2) Bill is a chance to put this right. With franchising, fair pay and investment in modern vehicles, we can build a system that works for passengers, supports jobs and meets our climate goals. Reliable and affordable public transport should not be a luxury; it is the foundation of a fair economy and connected communities. My constituents in the City of Durham deserve no less. They deserve a transport service that serves local people, not profit, and Ministers must act to deliver it.

14:10

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

I was listening to Radio 4 yesterday evening, and I was hearing about transport problems in London. Let’s face it: when we hear about transport problems in London, we know exactly what they mean, but pity also the poor people in the provinces who rarely come to London but have to hear all about London’s daily problems. In Devon, the struggle with our rail infrastructure is not just an occasional disruption; it is an everyday reality. Every year, there are around 50 million rail journeys to, from or within the south-west of England, yet according to the Office of Rail and Road, between January and March this year, only 67% of South Western Railway services ran on time, meaning that one in three trains arrived late.

Those figures were collected even before the disruption on South Western Railway over the summer, when speeds were reduced because of the hot, dry weather caused by the “soil moisture deficit”. A journey from Honiton to London, which should take a little over three hours, was dragged out to nearly four. Services from Axminster, Whimple and Feniton to Exeter were reduced to just one every two hours. That is not a service that people can rely on for work, for getting to college or for family life, and with hotter summers set to become more frequent, we need a lasting solution.

Even in normal times, the line is fragile. It depends on a long single-track section, which means that if one train is late, other trains are delayed, too. Trains back up at passing points, delays ripple down the line, and at busy times South Western Railway has to cut—or it has been cutting, at least—carriage numbers in half, leaving people crammed in.

One solution would involve increasing rail capacity along the line between Axminster and Exeter. At its heart, there would be a new 3-mile section of dual track near Whimple and Cranbrook. That single improvement would make a huge difference. With the double track in place, South Western Railway could run an additional hourly shuttle service between Axminster and Exeter, which would give Honiton and Axminster two trains every hour to Exeter and would mean that Whimple and Feniton would get a reliable hourly service. People would have better onward connections from Exeter St Davids to Plymouth, Barnstaple, Bristol, Birmingham and beyond.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

My hon. Friend makes a really interesting point about dualling of line. I have been campaigning in my constituency of Harrogate and Knaresborough to dual the line between Knaresborough and York for the exact same reasons and benefits that my hon. Friend is describing. Does he agree that, if this Government want to get on with the job of growth, going further and faster on investing in dualling lines like ours would be a way to do it?

[Richard Foord]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. He points to how it is much more affordable simply to dual a piece of track than it is to invest in new railway lines, as we talked about a lot in the last Parliament.

For students studying at Exeter college, for workers heading into Exeter and for businesses trading across the south-west, such a solution would be transformative. It would make the railway more resilient. When there are delays, whether they are because of flooding, autumn leaves or dry clay embankments, trains could pass more easily. With the Government planning around 20,000 new homes along the line between Axminster and Exeter, demand on this stretch of railway will only increase.

Finally, we cannot ignore the rolling stock—the trains themselves. The diesel fleet is nearly 40 years old. Reliability is failing and spare parts are running out. We need Government decisions on new trains—battery, electric or hybrid—so that by the early 2030s we might have a modern, clean, reliable fleet. Rural and coastal communities such as Honiton and Sidmouth must not be left behind. South Western Railway is doing what it can. Since I asked the Rail Minister a question this morning at Transport questions, South Western Railway has announced replacement buses from Axminster to Exeter, and between Feniton, Whimple and Exeter. But that is a sticking plaster. What we really need is investment that would allow it to run reliable trains, not just replacement bus services. People in the south-west pay many of the same taxes as those in London, but face long delays, overcrowding and fewer trains. It is time for the Government to demonstrate that attention to transport in the south-west is just as necessary as that in London.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. With an immediate three-minute limit, I call Andrew Cooper.

14:15

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I will do my best to indulge you on the fly.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this debate. Transport is not just about going from one place to another; it is about enabling progress. It opens doors to education, employment and enterprise, while also keeping us connected to the people and communities that matter most. But for many communities, particularly across the north, transport has not been a catalyst for opportunity, but a source of disadvantage.

Deep-rooted inequalities in regional infrastructure have left countless towns and cities disconnected, limiting access to jobs, education and essential services. The consequences of this divide are tangible, affecting lives, livelihoods and the ability of entire regions to thrive. That is because transport investment in the UK has been starkly unequal for decades. While London and the south-east have benefited from sustained strategic funding, many towns and cities across the north have been left behind, with ageing infrastructure, underfunded networks and, crucially, missed opportunities for growth. The numbers speak for themselves. Historically, per capita transport spending in London has dwarfed that of the north. Indeed, analysis shows that had the north received the same level of transport infrastructure investment per person as London between 2010 and 2020, it would have gained an additional £66 billion, funding it has ultimately missed out on due to regional disparities in infrastructure investment.

In my local area, inadequate transport infrastructure remains one of the most significant barriers to unlocking the full potential of Northwich, Winsford and Middlewich. It is a major obstacle to attracting new businesses, creating jobs and driving investment. But I hope that change is coming thanks to this Labour Government. The recent reforms to the Treasury’s Green Book represent a turning point. The updated Green Book places greater emphasis on regional equity, and on the long-term social and economic benefits of investment. It recognises that value is not just measured in pounds and pence, but measured in lives improved, communities connected and futures transformed. It is a chance to rebalance our economy, invest in the infrastructure that powers productivity, and ensure that no matter where someone lives—whether it be Middlewich or Manchester, Winsford or Warrington—they have access to the same opportunities as someone living in London or the south-east.

The Government have begun this policy with action: with real, visible investment in northern transport, from rail upgrades and new bus routes to road building schemes, such as the Middlewich eastern bypass in my constituency. I am proud to say it was this Labour Government who delivered the investment for this vital project—although I suspect the former Minister approved it just to stop me camping outside her office and badgering her in the Tea Room. I am grateful for her support, but her successor should know that this now means my lobbying powers are free to be directed to other noble causes, such as improvements to the Winnington bridge and step-free access at Northwich station

14:15

[Jo Platt (Leigh and Atherton) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for bringing this really important debate to the House.

Growth goes where growth is, but when transport is inefficient, access to opportunity is limited. Leigh and Atherton, once thriving industrial hubs, now sit between Manchester and Liverpool, alongside towns such as St Helens, Warrington, Wigan and Salford, yet we remain locked in outdated transport systems. Roads built around our mills and factories are now clogged with ever-increasing traffic. This is not just a local issue. The gridlock we face is a shared burden and a shared injustice. Leigh ranks in the top 1% nationally for transport related social exclusion. In my constituency, over 40,000 people—37% of residents—face a high risk of exclusion due to poor transport; that is twice the north-west average, and nearly five times that of Greater Manchester. Poor connectivity and an over- reliance on cars are isolating our most vulnerable older people, disabled residents and low-income families. People are being trapped in cycles of poverty and missed opportunity.

I have spoken to residents who set off three hours early to make a hospital appointment. Others turn down college places or job offers simply because they cannot afford a car, and opportunity is out of reach without one. That should not be the case, and it does not have to be. We must invest in accessible, sustainable transport—walking, cycling, buses and trains—across every region, not just where the growth is.

Greater Manchester is a shining example of the first stages of the transformative impact that transport devolution can deliver. Over £30 million is being invested in safer, cleaner transport through the Bee Network. Services such as the V1 and V2 buses in Leigh and Atherton are vital, and the planned new railway station in Golborne is a huge step forward. But we must go further. Without reliable and inclusive transport, access to jobs, education and healthcare remains a postcode lottery. I welcome the discussions to expand Metrolink to areas such as Salford Crescent, Wigan and Leigh. Those investments must continue.

There is also the proposal to connect our two great regions, spearheaded by Greater Manchester Mayor, Andy Burnham, and Liverpool City Region Mayor, Steve Rotheram. With the Greater Manchester economy growing faster than the UK’s as a whole, after their recent comments I say to the leadership of Reform, who are not in their seats, that we have proven what ambition backed with investment can achieve for our region. It is transport infrastructure that is driving that success. We on this side of the House will not let short-sighted politics stall the north’s momentum.

14:21

[Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank my constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), for securing this vital debate. In Derby, like many other parts of the country, transport is the glue that holds our community together, but Derby is also a city of makers. We have a unique transport manufacturing heritage to be proud of, and a future to be excited about.

If we are talking about investment in our public transport, however, it is a totally different story. While Derby powers our supply chain, the east midlands has been left lagging behind when it comes to funding our transport infrastructure. Under successive Governments, our region has sat consistently at the back of the queue for investment. In 2023-24, that meant that transport spending in the east midlands was just 54% of the UK average—shockingly, the lowest of any UK region or nation, as we heard earlier. That is not just a number. It is delays, lost opportunities and frustration for people just trying to go about their day to day.

Ask anyone in our community and they will say that they have been stuck on the same congested roads for years, and they have watched vital bus services disappear, as our region has faced the consequences of the deepest bus cuts in the country since 2008. Understandably, people are absolutely fed up. That is why I am proud that this Labour Government, along with our fantastic East Midlands Mayor, Claire Ward, are wasting no time turning the page. With a record £2 billion secured earlier this year to tackle congestion and improve connectivity across the east midlands, we are finally starting to put things right.

That is not all. Whether it is moving forward on upgrades to the A38 to end Derby’s traffic gridlock, or the introduction of the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill, protecting thousands of miles of lifeline routes across our region, progress is being made. There is still lots more to do to put decades of under-investment behind us. Securing projects such as the electrification of the midlands main line would supercharge our region, creating 5,000 jobs, reducing journey times and improving reliability, as well as unlocking over £400 million worth of economic benefit for the region.

To transform our transport infrastructure, we need sustained, long-term funding in our region that, at the very minimum, matches the UK average. I look forward to seeing that delivered through action and investment from a Government who back Derby and the east midlands.

14:25

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

I would like to talk about the importance of the impact of both austerity and covid on entrenching the regional transport inequalities we have heard so much about today. I will also talk about the importance of our making the most of our existing infrastructure, which has ended up crumbling and neglected after the previous 14 years, and emphasise the importance of improving services and restoring those battered by austerity and covid.

This issue is particularly important in coastal communities. I am proud to sit next to my co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on coastal communities, my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume). Despite the geographical differences between our two constituencies, we share a concern about the connectivity challenges in our coastal communities, and we know that many other places are experiencing the same problems because, as much as coastal communities have many assets, they are fundamentally at the end of the line. They are therefore—I say this advisedly to those currently in the Chamber—most exposed and vulnerable to the populism and dark forces we have seen around us recently.

When we think about all that, we understand the need to connect people to opportunities for growth and to break down the barriers to opportunity—two of our key missions as a country. On that great strategic point, I urge anyone from Stagecoach and Kent county council who is listening to restore the No. 9 bus between Ramsgate and Canterbury for precisely that reason. One of our hospitals is there, as are two of our universities and the further education colleges. I know children, young people and adults whose opportunities have been limited and cut back because that No. 9 bus service no longer exists.

Let me talk about the impact of covid, particularly in respect of the crumbling and neglected infrastructure we have as a consequence. Ashford International train station has been international in name only since the covid pandemic, and Eurostar’s expansion plans do not include the restoration of international rail services to Kent. Cutting the length of train journeys from Kent to Paris and Brussels by two hours would greatly improve the opportunities for us as a community and, indeed, for growth. The Good Growth Foundation has pointed out that this would improve growth by £2.4 billion across five years. Unlike other so-called affluent parts of the south- east, places like mine really need that economic growth.

On existing infrastructure, I have one last message for the Minister about Ramsgate port: it is important to restore passenger ferries, at least, to a place that is desperately in need of that kind of connectivity.

14:28

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

I am pleased to follow my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington), who talked about the impact of covid on transport. Many of my constituents across Lichfield, Burntwood and the villages rely on the cross-city line to get to Birmingham for work, for social activities—to visit the theatre or go for a night out—and for many other reasons. Unfortunately, during the pandemic the service on the line was cut from four trains an hour to just two. That was understandable at the time, given the circumstances, but years have passed and those trains are still not back.

The cross-city line is the busiest commuter train line in the country outside of London. In the year before covid, a million journeys started at Lichfield City, going towards Birmingham New Street. Lichfield is a city of 35,000 people and a million journeys began at that train station. It is a busy line—it is important infrastructure. This debate is about regional transport inequality; the idea that on a line that busy that served anywhere in the south-east or London the service would be halved and nothing done about it for years is absolutely laughable. But because it is in the west midlands, the services have not come back.

The villain in this piece is just how busy New Street is. It is over capacity; we cannot get any more trains in or out. That is why I am so glad to have campaigned to get the midland rail hub project funded and to have co-ordinated dozens of Back-Bench MPs to support the campaign. That will improve the capacity at New Street, meaning that we can get our trains back on the city line. It also means that 50 stations across a number of regions will get to see improvements in their services. That is a fantastic example of this Government investing in the projects that we need to close some of the transport inequality gaps, and I thank the Minister for that.

As I have a minute left, and given that those improvements are coming, let me say this. I have a line from Lichfield to Burton that passes by the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire. It would make a brilliant place for a passenger service, so that everybody from around the country can get to the National Memorial Arboretum to enjoy the fantastic facility that it is and take part in remembrance all year round, not just in November.

14:30

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

I strongly believe that a regional geography is the right scale to make substantial public transport improvements. That is why I back this Government’s devolution agenda as the right approach to improving transport. The real inequality of the future will not be north versus south or urban versus rural, but between those areas that have well-respected, ambitious mayors and those that do not. For the sake of passengers, I hope that the Government move swiftly to fill in the gaps on the devo map, even if there is not complete consensus.

Inequality in transport is already linked to some extent to governance. In the past, larger areas had passenger transport executives, and that gives them a head start, as more power heads to strategic authorities. I still believe that the Government could go further to encourage the creation of more executive bodies to co-ordinate transport regionally.

I also remain concerned about the highways-transport split. I very much welcome clause 25 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, which will allow mayoral combined authorities to take on civil enforcement of traffic contraventions, but we could go further. Fundamentally, the same organisation needs to be responsible for the bus, the bus lane and the bus stop.

We also need to think differently about geography. From the Victorian radial rail network through to modern motorways, there has for too long been an assumption that all roads and rails should lead to London, but we cannot just think north to south; it must be east to west too. That is why I warmly welcome the £2.5 billion commitment to East West Rail to rebalance decades of under-investment in cross-country links. I will continue to call for the expansion of the Luton-Dunstable busway to Leighton Buzzard and on to Bletchley, linking it into East West Rail.

The Minister will be delighted to know that my final question is a train question, rather than a bus question. I am keen to hear from him about plans for Great British Railways within regions. Does he believe that the current Network Rail regions are the right ones to build on as we move to GBR, or does he believe there are other opportunities and shapes other than triangles?

We must always see transport as a driver of growth. In order to build thriving networks, we need a relentless focus on growing passenger numbers, which we can all do, as we know that September is Catch the Bus Month.

14:33

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

We know that when it comes to transport inequality, as we have just heard, the people who are left behind most are younger people, disabled people, people on low incomes and older people. Madam Deputy Speaker, I note that when you were the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, you called for an older people’s commissioner. In this respect, that could provide real value.

In the time available to me, I will major in as many transport forms as possible. Yesterday I spoke about buses. In Bournemouth, we are crying out for a better No. 33 bus, the reinstatement of the bus route in and to Throop, and a bus to the airport that is better and goes more frequently. We need a stronger provision of electric vehicle charging infrastructure; it is typically concentrated in more affluent areas, and where it is concentrated in public areas it does not work. When it comes to trains, I am campaigning for an accessible Pokesdown station and faster trains to London.

I want to talk particularly about the problems that people experience locally with accessing driving tests. The Labour Government have committed to 10,000 additional driving tests, and we have four additional instructors in Poole, but people in Bournemouth East have to travel to Poole to take their test, because their centre was closed in 2019. Operators are using bots to sweep up months-worth of test dates and sell them to parents and learners at a high profit. That is not fair, and it is an example of inequality. I have written to the Driving and Vehicle Standards Agency, but it is nowhere to be seen on this issue. I want this Government to be on the side of learners and to tackle the driving test backlog.

I welcome the fact that we have £1.1 million in funding coming to Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole council for the improvement of transport infrastructure, and that we have an extra £2 million to invest on potholes. I particularly want to make the case, for the first time in this Chamber, for the resurrection of a tram network in Bournemouth, which I think is really important. [Interruption.] I can hear murmurs of assent from my hon. Friends. Everyone loves a tram. Trams foster economic, social and cultural growth around them. In Bournemouth, which has joined two other towns to create a super-city region, we are falling behind in economic growth opportunities because we do not have the interconnectedness we need.

I was going to say more, but I will just briefly say that if we can have faster trains to London, accessible stations, the potholes in our roads filled, better bus services, more driving tests and a tram network which, because of its permanence, attracts businesses, organisations and people to move into our areas—those areas are already thriving, but could thrive so much more—Bournemouth would no longer be left behind; Bournemouth would thrive. It is a fantastic, beautiful town, which I am so proud to represent, and with the elimination of our transport inequalities, there would be no limit to the success we could achieve.

14:36

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

The perception many people have of Kent is one of prosperity because of our close proximity to London, but the reality is more complicated. In my constituency, we have widespread inequalities, and communities feel overlooked and disconnected, as is all too evident in the way our transport network operates.

Nowhere has that been more evident than in the decision taken by Eurostar in 2020 to stop the international rail service calling at Ashford International. My hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington) highlighted the importance of international connectivity to the south-east for its economic benefits. The decision has left the international section of the station, which cost about £80 million of taxpayers’ money, sitting idle, for over five years so far. This autumn, the Office of Rail and Road is due to make a decision about whether new providers of international rail will have access to the international depot at Temple Mills in east London. As the ORR comes to its decision, I ask the Minister whether the Government will give a clear indication that they will favour operators who commit to return such services to Ashford.

The London focus of our transport network means that, while there are good services between Ashford and London, there is not the same provision of services for my constituents looking to travel across Kent or make local journeys that do not involve the capital. This disproportionately affects those who do not have access to a car such as young people, elderly residents, the disabled and lower-income households. It limits their access to work opportunities, healthcare appointments and local amenities. In particular, I have been contacted by many constituents since I was elected who have complained about the poor condition of local bus services. That especially affects the residents of Hawkinge and the smaller villages, such as the constituent whose son is disabled and is unable to find a job because the bus from his village starts too late in the morning, or the older constituents who are unable to visit theatres in Canterbury because the last bus runs before the end of the performance.

Those are just a couple of the many examples I could cite showing why my constituency, and Kent as a whole, is crying out for properly supported bus routes. Having these routes is vital to breaking down barriers to opportunity and unlocking economic growth in our communities. I welcome the fact that, when Labour’s Bus Services (No. 2) Bill is passed into law, it will play a major role in reforming our broken bus system. I hope that the administration at Kent county council will take full advantage of the powers the Bill will give it to deliver the improvement in bus services that my constituents deserve.

14:39

[Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this debate. She knows my constituency well, and will be familiar with many of the issues that I will raise.

Erewash is at the geographic and, dare I say, emotional heart of the east midlands— the halfway point between Derby and Nottingham. Long Eaton, which I represent, was scarcely on the map before the railways, and Ilkeston, like the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes), used to have its own tram. Those places are defined by industry and are inherently linked to public transportation, but by the middle of the 20th century, that legacy had been whittled away as all focus moved towards the car.

For 50 years, Ilkeston did not have a train station at all, but after years of cross-party campaigning, its new station opened in 2017. However, lots of people in Ilkeston tell me that the station has been a missed opportunity. Services are once per hour, meaning that it is not as attractive to commuters as it could be. Ilkeston is in Derbyshire, but passengers cannot even get a train to Derby from the station.

I am pleased, though, to hear discussion about the Maid Marian line again. That line would restore the link from Nottinghamshire to the Erewash valley line, perhaps enabling those new services connecting Mansfield and Derby to call at Ilkeston. At present, although the Erewash valley line bears my constituency’s name, it does not carry any local passenger services. If it were brought into more frequent use, maybe we could one day reopen the Stapleford and Sandiacre station. If we are dreaming, perhaps one day we could even bring back Draycott and Breaston station, too.

In many ways, Long Eaton was fortunate to keep its train station after the 1960s. The station has frequent services to many destinations, but there are still things that it notably lacks. The ramps up to the platform are very steep, and the lifts work only when the station is staffed, which presents real difficulties for my disabled constituents. The platform is too short, which can cause havoc for longer trains as only some doors can open.

Finally, let me address buses. The 21 bus used to link Ilkeston, Cotmanhay and Kirk Hallam directly with the Queen’s medical centre in Nottingham, one of our local major hospitals. Before the covid pandemic, the service was slashed to just once per hour, and afterwards it was slashed altogether. Now there are no direct buses from Ilkeston to the QMC, and for anyone trying to reach the hospital from Kirk Hallam by bus, it is a two-hour trip with at least two changes. It means getting a bus all the way into Derby before taking another bus, in the opposite direction, to Nottingham. It is madness.

[Samantha Niblett]

I am very familiar with my hon. Friend’s constituency, and I know that he was campaigning for good transport links way before he became an MP. On access to bus services, smaller villages such as Egginton in my South Derbyshire constituency are not served by a bus service at all. Does he agree that that truly ensures regional inequality across our country?

[Adam Thompson]

I agree completely with my hon. Friend. Indeed, for years the east midlands has languished, as my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North said in her opening remarks, on the bottom few rungs of the table for regional transport funding. I am glad that times are changing, however. The Treasury’s £2 billion commitment to transport in the east midlands earlier this year was bigger than I and colleagues in the region could ever have dreamed. I am so excited to see what transformation that investment will bring, and I will fight every day to ensure that Erewash sees the benefits of it.

If we are to have long-term change, the east midlands cannot rely on one-off awards, however. We need consistent investment, comprehensive planning reform, overhauled and empowered local government, and, in particular, changes to the Treasury rules to end the flat refusal to spend outside London and the greater south-east. Those are all positive prospects brought forward by this Government, and I look forward to seeing them become law.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. It might be helpful if I indicate that I will come to the Front Benchers at five minutes past 3. On a three-minute time limit, there is very little time for interventions.

14:43

[Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)]

Since I was elected last July, I have become closely acquainted with the long-distance London Paddington to Penzance line, which a number of my colleagues have mentioned. There was a big storm in 2014, and we were properly cut off for eight weeks; we could not get in or out of Cornwall by rail, because there is only one way to do so. Since then, an awful lot has been done to improve the resilience of the line, but phase 5 will be vital to strengthening the vulnerable coastal section and maintaining connectivity for Cornwall.

Cornwall sees a huge population increase in the summer, with about 4 million visitors, but we lack reliable year-round connections, which constrains our economy and restricts growth, as well as creating social isolation. Many of our students must travel for over an hour on public transport to further education providers, and travelling between their apprenticeships and colleges is often impossible, restricting their prospects.

As a result of our 2015 devolution deal, Cornwall council obtained greater transport powers, such as franchising and partnership agreements with local bus providers, which has helped and led to an increase in bus patronage. Cornwall was the first rural area in England to introduce smart ticketing, but that came at a cost: the council subsidises 50% of the public transport network, and it costs us an awful lot of money.

Under the previous Tory Government, the south-west had some of the lowest identifiable expenditure on public transport, at just £429 per head—the second lowest after the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson). I welcome the Government’s focus on long-term investment in transport infrastructure, including the fourfold increase in local transport grants. The funding for potholes will be hugely important in Cornwall, which has more than 4,600 miles of small roads.

The investment will be crucial for Cornwall’s economic growth. Cornwall’s chamber of commerce has said that transport connectivity is the top priority for the businesses it represents, because our transport links really hold us back. We used to receive EU funding of up to £1 billion, much of which was ploughed into transport because we did not have the funding from elsewhere. We have branch lines that would not exist had it not been for that money, but the funding has dried up now that the shared prosperity fund has finished, so we need the investment to continue.

Electrifying the main line would really help. Currently, there is a branch line passenger service that runs from Truro to Falmouth. There was a freight rail line at the end of it, so just 150 yards would open up so much for new industries such as critical minerals and would enable aggregates to be moved around. We have an airport that desperately needs a new public service obligation. Investment in transport infrastructure in Cornwall is essential for our economic growth and success in the future.

14:46

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

I am glad to be speaking in this debate, because far too many of my constituents are being held back by our transport system. On rail, Rugeley Trent Valley, just over the border in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Dave Robertson)—he is no longer in his place—is a striking example of what we are here to discuss. Two of the station’s three platforms can be reached only by a steep footbridge, meaning that wheelchair users, parents with prams and people with limited mobility are effectively barred from getting to Birmingham and Stafford. One constituent told me that his friend, who has mobility issues, literally had to crawl up and down the stairs to reach their connecting train.

West Midlands Railway fully supports installing lifts, but such major upgrades fall under Network Rail’s Access for All programme, for which demand is huge and funding is heavily oversubscribed. With more than 2,500 stations competing, Network Rail prioritises based on passenger numbers and the proximity of the next available accessible station. That means Rugeley loses out to larger hubs nearby, such as Stafford. Although Rugeley has been shortlisted in the past, other stations have scored higher under the system. The reality is that the next allocation of Access for All funding is still a distant prospect. In the meantime, passengers are offered so-called mitigations, such as going forward to the next accessible station and being sent back again, or being provided with road transport at the operator’s discretion. For many, that is simply not a viable or dignified option.

[Andrew Cooper]

Will my hon. Friend give way for a very short intervention?

[Josh Newbury]

Given your warning, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will not give way.

Accessibility upgrades such as lifts, ramps and reliable step-free routes must not be treated as optional extras in towns such as mine. They are essential to dignity, inclusion and fairness.

On buses, Cannock Chase shows why change is long overdue. We are one of the most car-dependent parts of the country, yet many still rely on buses. Over the years we have lost routes into Birmingham and the Black Country, and services after 7 pm and at weekends are rare. In my part of the world, we see stark evidence of a public service run for private profit and paid for in growing inequality. Elderly residents tell me that they cannot reach appointments, parents struggle to get children to school, and workers have to turn down shifts.

Nationally, bus services in the most deprived areas of England have been cut 10 times more than in the least deprived. Some communities have been cut off altogether, such as Slitting Mill, just outside Rugeley, which has no service at all, despite once having a direct bus all the way to Wolverhampton.

The Government’s Bus Services (No. 2) Bill—I was immensely proud to serve on the Bill Committee and to support it last night—will arrest and begin to reverse the long-term decline that we have seen for far too long. Whether it is the last bus that never comes or the platform that cannot be reached, my constituents know what regional transport inequality looks like. I welcome the Labour Government’s determination to put fairness and accessibility at the heart of transport policy. I will keep pressing to ensure that my constituents get the share of investment they deserve.

14:49

[Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)]

To grow our economy, we need good connectivity. In coastal communities such as Scarborough and Whitby, we are struck in the slow lane. Scarborough, with its heritage, culture and captivating coastline, is a popular tourist destination, attracting 3.9 million visitors last year. The train from Scarborough to York is an essential transport link for visitors as well as commuters, but with only one service an hour, opportunity and growth are being choked off.

We need a twice-hourly service. This proposal is backed by York and North Yorkshire Mayor David Skaith, local businesses, my constituents and Lord Blunkett, who listed the service increase as one of his rail priorities in his report, “Yorkshire’s Plan for Rail”, published this year. Scarborough’s wonderful Stephen Joseph theatre has supported calls for a twice-hourly service, stating that audience members leave performances early to catch their train. Rather like its latest production, “Noises Off”, this is a farce.

We have businesses in Scarborough and nearby Seamer that are looking to attract more employees, but with such an irregular service, these opportunities are simply out of reach for many people. We have enough platforms and enough demand for a more regular rail service. The operator, TransPennine Express, says that one of the barriers to providing a twice-hourly service is a shortage of drivers. It insists that it must train its own drivers on its own routes. I would be grateful if the Minister could address the issue of train drivers in his closing remarks, and say whether he is exploring new ways to ensure that the local need for drivers is met.

I welcome the news that York and North Yorkshire combined authority will receive £94 million in local transport grant capital funding over the next four years. However, the combined authority, which covers a huge geographical area, is not part of the transport for city regions, so its settlement is not nearly as large as that of most combined authorities.

[Tom Gordon]

Will the hon. Lady give way on that point?

[Alison Hume]

No, I am afraid I have to carry on.

Unless we equip our first Labour rural metro mayor in York and North Yorkshire with the economic firepower to deliver better buses and trains, we not only limit the opportunity for towns like Scarborough to contribute to economic growth, but risk failing to break down barriers to opportunity in coastal communities.

14:52

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

When we talk about regional transport inequality, the east midlands, where I was born and have lived most of my life, comes to mind as one of the clearest examples of such inequality, as my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) has said. Over the past five years, per-head transport spend in the east midlands has fallen to just 54% of the UK average—the lowest of any region or nation. As has already been said, had we simply received the English average, we would have had £7 billion more for our buses, roads and railways.

Rail funding in the east midlands is particularly unequal, at £175 per head in 2023-2024—barely 40% of the English average, and a third of what the west midlands received. These are not just abstract figures; they affect daily life. They mean high car dependency, low levels of bus usage, and a sparse and unreliable rail network. Three quarters of our stations are served by only one train per hour or fewer. This is what chronic under-investment looks like on the ground for my constituents.

As has been mentioned, there have recently been positive commitments, which I welcome, including the £2 billion allocated to our East Midlands Mayor, Claire Ward. But we have to be honest: with huge sums being spent elsewhere on HS2, the trans-Pennine upgrade, East West Rail and the lower Thames crossing—to name but a few fantastic projects—the money committed to the east midlands will not address the long-standing imbalances. Without purposeful intervention, I fear that the east midlands’ relative position will simply worsen.

So what needs to change? First, we need funding parity. I would like to see a transparent path towards bringing transport spend in the east midlands up to the English average, including on rail, where the gap is deepest. Secondly, we need certainty. We need a long-term, multi-year pipeline for road, rail, bus, station and active travel investments, rather than piecemeal one-off projects, so that local authorities and industry can plan properly. Thirdly, I would like to see housing growth matched by transport capacity. My constituency is delivering the housing that this Government want to see, and it is important that the transport is there as well.

Finally, I must mention midland main line electrification. The economic case is overwhelming: it would unlock £400 million-worth of benefits and 5,000 jobs. In contrast, keeping the scheme under review risks £40 million to £70 million in additional costs. My ask today is therefore straightforward: please, Minister, look at that scheme again.

14:55

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

Meur ras, Madam Deputy Speaker. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) on securing this important debate to highlight the disparity in the effectiveness and adequacy of transport between different regions.

I would like to speak about my constituency of Camborne, Redruth and Hayle and to consider how specific issues affect travel in remote coastal areas such as Cornwall, as my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) has mentioned, particularly in relation to home-to-school transport. Because of Cornwall’s geography, being at the end of a long peninsula, it is characterised by remote communities, limited transport infrastructure and a high proportion of small settlements, which means that delivering services is inherently more expensive.

The recently closed fair funding review consulted on updating the system of distribution, including assessing local authorities’ experiences of delivering multiple services, such as home-to-school transport. As my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth again highlighted, the south-west ranks in the bottom half of regional transport expenditure rankings in 2023-24, yet Cornwall faces distinct geographical challenges. It covers a very large area with a dispersed population, which results in longer school journeys, as many pupils live far from their nearest school. There are also limited public transport options in rural areas, necessitating dedicated school transport. These place-based characteristics are compounded by pressures on the special educational needs and disabilities system, with a rising number of pupils requiring specialist transport. Yet the funding formula does not fully reflect the complexity and cost of providing the service.

Roads in remote coastal and rural areas are more vulnerable to weather-related disruption, meaning transport services require extra contingency planning and resilience funding. Seasonal pressures exacerbate these challenges too, with visitors and seasonal workers increasing congestion and wear on infrastructure, adding to maintenance costs and planning complexity.

When he gets to his feet, I hope the Minister will be able to address some of the particular issues affecting remote coastal areas such as Cornwall, and I would appreciate a further discussion with him on this matter, particularly given Cornwall’s distinct devolution complications.

14:45

[Sarah Russell (Congleton) (Lab)]

I was quite tempted to stand up this afternoon and just say the word “pothole” over and over again for three solid minutes, as the peculiarity of such an approach might really bring home to the Minister, who I know has been doing his best on these matters, quite how strongly my constituents feel about the state of their roads.

The Government did give Cheshire East several million pounds more in this year’s Budget to deal with road maintenance backlogs than in recent years, which was very much appreciated by my constituents. However, the reality is that 14 years of chronic underfunding has left my roads in a catastrophic state. I cannot emphasise enough how dark, dangerous and worrying rural roads are—the number of young people who die on the roads in my constituency is absolutely horrific. Similarly, I cannot emphasise enough that we need separate funding for significant safety upgrades, as well as a dramatic increase to the road maintenance pot as soon as the Government are able to do so.

There is another matter concerning roads in my constituent that I want to draw attention to. Gritting might sound like a trivial thing to those living in an urban area, but gritting in rural areas is absolutely critical. Our roads get a lower level of use, and the result is that they freeze and stay frozen for longer periods of time.

One impact of my local authority having had so many financial challenges over the past 14 years has been reductions in gritting. There are schools in my rural areas that have no pavements outside them, and the roads in front of them are completely and utterly ungritted. When those children are dropped off at school, they are put into a road—alongside cars—which has not been gritted at all. Headteachers do their best to mitigate the associated risks by not demanding that parents bring their children in on time, so the lack of safety features not only puts children at risk, but undermines their education.

Let me contrast that with London, where automatic number plate recognition cameras help to shut roads off completely at specific times of day. I find it staggering that we have such a complete contrast in treatment. Of course, I want children in London to be safe; this is not about taking things away from London schools, but it is very much about children in my constituency, as well as older people and others, having the same access and safety as everyone else.

Briefly, given that I have only 30 seconds left, I want to touch on Northern Rail and the complete lack of Sunday services in my constituency. The strikes have been going on for a year, and we desperately need the issue to be resolved. Sandbach station rail accessibility, including the lack of an accessible lift at the station, is a huge issue. I echo points made by colleagues about the importance of funding such things properly. Lastly, there has been a 67% reduction in buses in my local area over the past 15 years. We must improve on that desperate situation.

15:00

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

I will do my best to speak at high speed, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I want to say a few words about my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood): she was an outstanding Minister and the Department’s loss is the Whips Office’s gain. She will be much missed on the Transport Front Bench.

I am grateful, too, to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this debate. She and I represent constituencies in the squeezed midlands—regions home to 10 million people that have historically been denied a fair share of funding and political attention. As has been noted already, the east midlands receives the lowest transport funding per head of any region, although the west midlands held that unhappy status until recently. The rail line between Birmingham and Nottingham is slower, mile for mile, than that between Manchester and Leeds. The west midlands has the lowest share of public transport journeys of any English region, followed by the east midlands. That fuels congestion, road safety problems and potholes.

Birmingham’s roads are a special case. We have one of the last private finance initiative contracts in the country. When originally issued, local government austerity and the high inflation of the early 2020s were not foreseen. The previous Government tried to withdraw support for the PFI contract without a clear plan, which was ruled unlawful. I know that the new Minister will be looking at that closely, and I look forward to working with him to get a fair deal for Birmingham.

Most public transport journeys are by bus and half the industry’s income now comes from public funding, yet public accountability lags behind. This summer, National Express announced major changes to the X20 and 61 routes. People in Allens Cross and parts of the New Frankley estate lost their direct connection to Birmingham, and some older residents no longer have direct bus access to the Queen Elizabeth hospital. I am grateful to the hundreds of people who signed petitions, including one that I organised. I have met National Express and Transport for West Midlands, and I hope that we can find a way forward.

Significant investment has been announced for commuter rail. I have spoken frequently in this House about rebuilding Kings Norton station as part of a midlands rail hub. In the interest of time, I will only say how grateful I am that Ministers listened; I hope that we can make progress on restoring that service’s frequency.

Finally, we must be ambitious. Birmingham Corporation Tramways once ran services to my constituency. The original 1984 vision for a revitalised metro included a loop serving Northfield, Longbridge, Frankley and Rubery. That vision was right, and I hope that we can find funding for a feasibility study for a south Birmingham extension.

Regional transport inequality hinders economic growth and denies opportunities to my constituents. I am glad that the House has had the chance to debate this issue. I think this is my stop, so I will.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for his timekeeping and the speed with which he included all that. That brings us to the Front Benchers, remembering that we would like to leave some time for the Member who introduced the debate to wind up. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

15:03

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

I was all too conscious at Transport questions this morning not only to ensure that I did not, after last night’s scolding, repeat the heresy of “you” or “yours”, Madam Deputy Speaker, but to keep my questions brief. Consequently, I did not have time to put on the record—for the third time in less than a year—a formal welcome on behalf of my party to the new shadow Transport Secretary. Therefore, notwithstanding the fact that the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden) is no longer in the Chamber, I formally congratulate him on his elevation.

As former Transport Minister, the right hon. Gentleman knows all about the transformative effect of transport, having only recently hopped aboard the overnight shuttle from Durham to Basildon. On that tortuous journey from the north of England to the south-east, he would have glimpsed the huge inequalities in transport provision across our country. Be it trains or buses, roads or air travel, where people live or their business is situated has a massive effect on their mobility. Mobility—the ability to move from A to Z and all points in between—is key to a modern economy and a cohesive society.

The statistics paint a stark picture of, to coin a phrase, a two-tier system. Last year, for example, transport spending in London was over £1,300 per head, compared with under £400 per head in the east midlands. New research from Transport for the North reveals that over 11 million people in England face a high risk of social exclusion specifically because of inadequate transport systems. That represents a 14% increase—an extra 2 million people—since 2019. In the north-east, well over 30% of residents face a high risk of transport-related social exclusion, compared with below 3% in London. And who are the excluded? It will come as no surprise that, as Transport for the North has highlighted, it is disproportionately low-income households, unpaid carers, the old and the disabled. The very people our transport system should be helping the most are the ones facing its greatest barriers.

It is not just the north of England suffering from these inequalities. Minehead in Somerset, for example, is virtually cut off. The railway station closed in 1971, and my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) tells me that the No. 28 bus appears to run on a whim. In Stratford-upon-Avon, Stagecoach has stopped running buses in the evening and at weekends, and there is no direct train service between the home of Shakespeare and London, undermining the town’s tourist and cultural economy. Transport is, of course, key to our tourist industry. That is why in Cornwall, the new Lib Dem council has cancelled the previous Tory administration’s plans to sell off Newquay airport, but it now needs more help than is currently being offered by the Government to make the critical investment the airport so badly needs.

Investment in transport is key. Even in London, where Transport for London is the envy of the rest of the country, more investment is needed. Repeated disruption on the District line is caused by some of the infrastructure being up to 130 years old, according to TfL. It sounds grim, but as my constituents are getting tired of hearing me say, we in Wimbledon and the rest of London do not know how lucky we are. Just imagine living in a region where services are sparse or non-existent, bus routes are cut, stations have been closed and the few trains running are routinely delayed.

I am addressing my remarks to the Minister, for whom I have high regard and no little sympathy, because the problems with regional transport inequalities are clearly not of his making, nor his Government’s, but of the past Tory Administration’s. Take buses, for example, where deregulation allowed private operators to cream off the profitable routes and abandon the rest. Between 2015 and 2023, over 1 billion passenger journeys were lost. In the north-west alone, bus routes were reduced from nearly 3,500 in 2015 to half that number in 2024.

Sadly, however, the problem still continues. My hon. Friend the Member for Eastleigh (Liz Jarvis) in the south-east of England tells me that three bus services have been cancelled since last summer. In the south-west and north-east, 56% of small towns are now identified as transport deserts or at risk of becoming so.

I do not doubt the Government’s good intentions, evidenced by the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill, but in some respects, things are getting worse. The Government’s decision to increase the bus fare cap from £2 to £3, for example, will only accelerate the decline in bus usage, hitting those who are already struggling the most. The Minister will rightly point to the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill and its many excellent provisions but, as with the soon-to-be-published rail Bill, no amount of legislation will solve the issue of regional transport inequality without the necessary investment. As we saw with High Speed 2 and, more recently, the spending review, those moneys are not forthcoming.

The electrification of the midland main line from London to Sheffield has now been cancelled, while at Dawlish, the critical work to protect the vital Paddington to Penzance main line from the sea has been put on hold despite the very real risks to regional connectivity. The same is true of our road network, where, for example, the promised widening of the A12, which would have supported the creation of 55,000 new homes in the Chelmsford area, has been cancelled.

As the Minister is fond of telling me, there is no magic money tree, which is why the only way to address regional transport inequality is to grow the economy—a growth that is impeded by the very inequality that growth would help to address. That is why the pump must be primed with more investment in our transport system and a far more ambitious approach to growth, which can be achieved not by wishing on a star or by the PM tying himself in knots with his red lines over Europe but by boldly re-engaging with the EU and thereby completing the virtuous circle of an integrated transport system driven by and driving a dynamic and growing economy.

I end by thanking the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this important debate and all Members for their excellent contributions.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Minister.

15:09

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

I join the Liberal Democrat spokesperson in thanking the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing the debate. It gives us an opportunity to talk about the chasm between the Government’s grand promises and the grim reality for passengers, businesses and communities, as has been ably demonstrated by many of the contributions from Back Benchers. I do not have time to do justice to all those who have made contributions: I will leave that task to the Minister. I will move quickly on to roads and the Government’s record on roads, which has come in for some criticism today.

The infrastructure spending review that the Conservatives were responsible for in the run-up to the last election was the road investment strategy 2, which ran from 2020 to 2025. That was some £24 billion of investment, delivering major upgrades, unlocking infrastructure to enable 186,000 new homes for our constituents, improving freeport and airport links, and improving safety with 151 refuge areas built on smart motorways. We now move to 2025-30, with RIS3, which is Labour’s opportunity to outshine us. Has it done so? Absolutely not. RIS3 is marked by the killing of key enhancements, which I will come to, and instead of action we have targets here and consultations there, but it is very light on delivery.

We have a Government of review and policy papers, and that speaks to a wider truth about the Government. It is led by a lawyer Prime Minister who values process over political judgment—just think about his approach to sacking our ambassador to Washington. The Prime Minister’s original defence was that the process was followed: there was no political judgment. We can see that in the transport policy too.

What we need is not process. We do not need further targets here and consultations there: we need action. We need action on the A12 improvements—a £1.2 billion project. The scheme had been signed off, the housing had been cleared and businesses had been relocated, but it was scrapped without warning by this Government. The A12 is a core artery for Essex and South Suffolk. What about the regional inequality of that region?

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)]

My hon. Friend said the magic word: “Essex”. Does he support the Transport for London (Extension of Concessions) Bill that I have tabled? TfL runs to Shenfield, Reading, Epping, Watford, Cheshunt and Amersham, way beyond the boundaries of Greater London. The Bill would require TfL to enable any local authority that is served by a TfL route or by a route to which a TfL concessionary scheme applies to opt in to the concessionary fare scheme, including the freedom pass for our old age pensioners.

[Jerome Mayhew]

I am aware that my hon. Friend’s Bill does not make a call on the public purse, at least on the Treasury, and it is for local authorities to opt into the scheme should they wish to. It sounds like a very exciting project and one that should be developed further.

I mentioned the A12 in East Anglia, but there is also the A47 near Great Yarmouth. The Conservatives’ RIS2 included dualling to North Tuddenham, which is going on at the moment—I declare an interest as it is in my constituency—as is the dualling of the Brundall to Blofield stretch of the A47. Labour came into power and cancelled all further improvements.

[Ben Goldsborough]

The shadow Minister talks about the A47, which runs through my constituency. Would he agree that the £200 million being spent on the improvement of the Thickthorn junction in our area will make a huge difference, compared to the £50 million wasted by Norfolk county council, run by his party, on a road that has not had an inch of tarmac laid?

[Jerome Mayhew]

The hon. Gentleman’s intervention gives me the opportunity to raise the proverbial eyebrow at his claiming credit for securing £200 million for the Thickthorn roundabout when that has been in process for many years before he was elected. As for the £50 million he mentions, I think he means the western link road, which would be a huge improvement. At the moment we have the equivalent of the M25 for Norwich, but it is missing one section of 3.9 miles. The Conservatives are squarely behind finishing it: I am surprised to hear that Labour does not support the residents of Norwich in a similar way.

I will move on to what Labour has done. It has cancelled the further improvements on the A47, particularly at the other end towards Peterborough. That is just another example of where East Anglia has been ignored by Labour. Buses are the most popular form of public transport and the most important one in areas of high deprivation. They are particularly important for poorer members of society, the young, elderly and disabled. The Conservatives recognise that—we recognise that price matters—so the last Government introduced the £2 bus fare cap, and our manifesto commitment at the last election was to maintain it throughout the course of this Parliament because we recognised how popular and useful it was in increasing bus ridership. When Labour came to power, it had a choice: it could back passengers or it could back the unions. One of its first—shameful—acts in government was to give a 15% pay rise to ASLEF train drivers, who are already the best paid in Europe, paid for by a 50% increase in bus fares for passengers around the country. That speaks to a wider truth: when it comes to it, Labour is the party of the unions and not of the people.

[Laurence Turner]

rose—

[Jerome Mayhew]

On that point, I will give way.

[Laurence Turner]

Does the shadow Minister agree with his predecessor—the last Conservative Rail Minister, Huw Merriman—who said this:

“Whilst it’s legitimate to debate the terms of the deal, the demonisation of train drivers and those onboard and at stations, who carry out a difficult and skilled job for the safety of passengers, is completely unfair. These people work hard and should be shown more respect.”?

[Jerome Mayhew]

I have no problem with the unions making demands—after all, they are representing the interests of their members. What I complain about is the Government giving way to them at the expense of the general public.

On trains, we have got the cancelled projects as well. The midland main line electrification has been cancelled, which has led to lay-offs and the loss of expertise. It is also causing problems for the procurement of new bi-mode trains, because we no longer have any certainty as to whether the line will be electrified. At Dawlish, the Conservative Government completed phases 1 to 4 of the improvements and reinforcement of the line. Phase 5 is all that remains. What have the Government done? They have kicked it into the long grass, as was mentioned by the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for which I give him credit.

Back in East Anglia, the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) highlighted the need for the Ely junction and Haughley junction projects in Cambridgeshire and Suffolk to be advanced, yet they have been ignored by the Government.

[Ben Goldsborough]

Will the shadow Minister give way?

[Jerome Mayhew]

I will not, because I am running out of time. I have already given way to the hon. Gentleman.

What is the big plan? It is one of nationalisation for railways. We must look at the Government’s motive—what do they think it is going to do? It is not about unifying track and train, because that was already in the Williams-Shapps review; that was going to happen without nationalisation. Is it about reducing fares? If so, it is backfiring, because nationalised train companies’ fares are rising above inflation. Is it about increasing efficiency? One would hope so, but through the Government’s nationalisation process they are decapitating the management teams that drive efficiency in the individual rail companies.

Is it about increasing passenger numbers? The inconvenient truth for Labour is that under privatisation passenger ridership on the railway doubled, because the companies were incentivised to chase ridership. That was driven by increased open access routes, yet the Government have opposed every single application for open access since the election. Is it to save money? If so, they are not doing a very good job. On South Western Railway—one of the first to be nationalised since the election—they wasted £250 million on infrastructure overspend with the rolling stock leasing companies due to Government negotiating incompetence.

The truth is that the Government are doing it because it is an article of Labour faith—faith in the big state—and also a key demand of the unions. How has it gone for them? As we have heard, ASLEF has already got a 15% pay rise, and the RMT is striking now. Next time, when GBR is finished, that strike will be national.

The Government are one year in. We have heard in the debate of cancelled scheme after cancelled scheme. We have also heard that prices have increased and that money has been diverted from passengers to union pay. That has done nothing for regional inequality, save for the industrial action that is spreading from London and engulfing the rest of the country. It is why passengers are so disappointed in Labour. They deserve better.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Minister.

15:19

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)]

I welcome today’s debate on regional transport inequality, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this time. I have 10 minutes to address the many excellent contributions made this afternoon, so Members must forgive my reluctance to entertain many interventions.

For decades, this country has faced a growing deficit of opportunity fuelled by the poor connectivity that has come to define too many communities. I have experienced at first hand the frustration felt by millions of people every day. Growing up in the north-east, I could wait hours for a bus that would never arrive, so I understand that missed shifts, missed lessons and missed appointments all lead to missed opportunities for hard-working families. Poor transport has deepened divides, isolated communities and eroded quality of life, all while stifling growth, hindering productivity and deterring investment. In my own region, Leeds is one of the largest European cities without a mass transit system. We are shamefully behind the curve, with people and businesses suffering as a result—but it does not have to be that way.

This Government are turning the page on decades of decline, ending short-sighted Whitehall-centric decision making and unlocking talent, ambition and potential right across the country. We are seizing a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change the way that things are done and building a stronger transport network that works for everyone, whoever they are and wherever they come from.

Later this year, we will set out that vision in our integrated national transport strategy. We will champion transport that is designed, built and run with people in mind, recognising that different places face different challenges and need different ways to solve them. The strategy will aim to make transport safer, more reliable and more accessible, helping everyone to feel more confident and able to use the network. We will encourage housing, healthcare and other services to work with transport, trying to tackle regional inequality in all its forms.

We know, however, that politicians in Westminster cannot fully grasp the reality of life in Warrington, Wolverhampton or Woking. That is why our Bus Services (No. 2) Bill puts power in the hands of local leaders, with the freedom to choose the approach that best serves their community. We recognise that a one-size-fits-all formula just will not work, so we are funding franchising pilots to better understand all the options on the table. The Bill also calls time on the plague of violence against women and girls and antisocial behaviour with training and enforcement measures to help make journeys safer for everyone.

We are backing those steps with landmark levels of investment. This year alone, £1 billion will help improve bus services and keep fares affordable. We will extend the £3 bus fare, which will put more money in passengers’ pockets, making bus travel a viable option for more communities, while improving access to jobs, education and healthcare where it is needed most.

We are also giving city mayors £15.6 billion to support wider local transport projects, including mass transit in Leeds, a metro extension in the north-east and so much more. To ensure that our towns, villages and rural areas, particularly outside London, are no longer left behind, we are not only committing £2 billion to help them tackle their unique challenges, but just last week we confirmed an extra £104 million in resource funding for local authorities, showing that they can better design, decide and deliver ambitious local transport projects.

[Martin Wrigley]

I am delighted with all the investment in cities with mayors; that is fantastic. However, in Dawlish, in Devon, we are once again left behind. Is that purely because we do not have a city mayor?

[Simon Lightwood]

As I just mentioned, we have committed £2 billion to helping those outside city areas and last week committed £104 million for resource funding across the country outside city areas.

Although we are eager for local leaders to take the reins, there is still an important part for central Government to play in tackling transport inequality, particularly on our roads and railways. We are investing billions to fix historical gaps in the network, reconnecting long-forgotten areas and tackling regional disparities head on. From major projects such as the TransPennine route upgrade, East West Rail and HS2 to improving motorways in Cumbria, Greater Manchester and the midlands, or funding to maintain and improve the road network, our mission to address inequality sits at the heart of everything we do.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

Will the Minister give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

I am going to make progress.

We are also delivering new train stations in the south-west and in Yorkshire, creating brand new rail links across the midlands, and backing road schemes to better connect and grow communities. Not only will those measures improve people’s everyday journeys, they will also create jobs, power growth and unlock new homes for families.

Last week, we announced that we are simplifying fares and expanding digital ticketing trials to make rail more accessible and affordable, with new digital trials now live in the east midlands and launching later this month in Yorkshire. Passengers can sign up to take part and benefit from automatic best-value fares, making rail travel simpler, smarter and more flexible.

Our commitment to investing is clear, but we are also working behind the scenes to ensure that every penny is well spent. We are reviewing the Green Book to give a fair hearing to all parts of the country. We have plans to recruit 300 new planners into the public sector by 2026, supporting local authorities and implementing new planning policies to enhance housing supply, leveraging private investment to bolster public funding and forging a faster and more efficient planning system.

I am pleased to see a strong contingent of Members from the east midlands in this debate, and I am glad that they recognise, like me, the importance of improving transport links to drive growth across the country and tackle regional inequalities. We recognise that transport spending has historically not been evenly distributed across the country. We are taking action to drive up prosperity and living standards across the UK, including addressing any imbalances where appropriate. That is not just the case for the east midlands. We are investing across the whole country, from enabling mass transit in West Yorkshire to reopening the Bristol and Portishead line in the south-west.

We are providing the East Midlands combined county authority with over £2 billion through the transport for city regions fund, with the east midlands receiving over £450 million from the local transport grant and the integrated transport block. I am very pleased to see that Mayor Claire Ward intends to use some of that £2 billion of funding to progress the case for a permanent bridge at Darley Abbey. That means that the east midlands will receive significantly more local transport spending per head than the England average in the coming years— £561 per person against an average of £398. We are investing in the region, including delivering improvements to the east coast main line and progressing the A38 Derby junctions scheme, which will improve safety, reduce delays and support house building. We are also committed to delivering the A46 Newark bypass, subject to planning consent.

I recognise the frustration that hon. Members and their constituents feel about the electrification of the midland main line, but we have had to prioritise our funding on schemes that will make the greatest difference for passengers and economic growth as soon as possible. Further electrification of the midland main line has been paused but will be kept under review as part of our pipeline for future funding. The new trains, however, will increase seat capacity and will mark a step change in passenger experience.

Members have advocated passionately for other schemes in their local areas. While I cannot address every scheme that was raised in this debate, we will always need to prioritise the funding that we have available. My officials will continue to work with their counterparts in local government and with other stakeholders to better understand local needs and potential pipelines.

I will now turn to specific contributions made in the debate.

[Richard Foord]

Will the Minister give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

No—I have a lot to get through.

I welcome the many contributions from across the House on issues with bus services in Members’ constituencies. The Government know how important good, reliable and frequent bus services are to local communities, and that is why we are investing £1 billion this year to support and improve services and giving local leaders more powers to improve services through the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill.

While I welcome the contribution of the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford), he not only seems to have forgotten the 14 years in which his party had the opportunity to improve bus services in regional constituencies but he also forgot to mention that his Government gave £26 million to the Conservative-controlled county councils that cover that constituency.

However, in rural areas and places with poor public transport, driving is not a luxury; it is a lifeline. The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency continues to work hard to combat the unscrupulous practice of reselling tests across the country. In July, we announced over 50 new road and rail schemes, many of which will benefit the constituencies of Members who have spoken in this debate. That includes the midlands rail hub, which we are backing with £123 million and which will create links to more than 50 locations. It also includes the Middlewich Road scheme, the A38 Derby junctions work, transformed rail services across Manchester and new stations in the south-west. We are addressing under-investment in Welsh rail infrastructure with a 10-year funding package of £445 million to meet its long-term connectivity needs and to help kickstart Welsh economic growth.

Turning to the comments of the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew), I will admit that the previous Government did allocate £27 billion for the road investment strategy 2, but that was revised down to £23 billion. From my calculations, RIS3 represents a £3 billion increase compared with the funding for RIS2.

[Jerome Mayhew]

Will the Minister give way on that point?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will bring my remarks to a close because Madam Deputy Speaker is growing impatient.

I am here today not just as the Minister for Local Transport, but as someone who knows what it is like to live in an underserved community, who has stood in the rain waiting for buses that never arrived, and who has seen at first hand the impact of poor connections, so I could not be more intent on delivering real change where it is needed most. Our plan for English devolution will shift even more power away from Whitehall. Our industrial strategy will drive investment and growth in all regions, and our infrastructure strategy will boost living standards across the UK.

This issue transcends departmental silos. Since last July, we have worked tirelessly to restore confidence and certainty. We are looking after the pennies and the pounds to improve lives and livelihoods across Britain, and I will continue to tackle the shameful deficit of opportunity that plagues this country. We will continue delivering our plan for change until we get the job done.

15:30

[Catherine Atkinson]

I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting the debate. I thank my many colleagues who spoke passionately and persuasively for better transport options for their regions, but also raised fantastic examples of new investment. The number of contributions shows how important transport equality is, and it is hugely heartening to hear the progress being made by this Government, backed by actual funding. I thank the Minister for his response. When it comes to regional transport equality, some of us may sit behind the Minister and echo my children’s oft-used refrain, “Are we nearly there yet?” but now we have a Government who have us driving in the right direction, on track to unlock the economic potential across the whole country.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered regional transport inequality.