Petitions

Debate between Adam Jogee and Rebecca Smith

Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

Further to a similar online petition of more than 4,200 signatures, I present this petition on local government reorganisation in Devon. The plans published in July by the Government appear to have been configured entirely to benefit the urban areas of Plymouth, Exeter and Torbay, and call into question service delivery, local democracy, and local identity across the county’s rural communities. Arguably there is no conceivable way that it can result in growth in every postcode. As a result I welcome the Prime Minister’s agreement yesterday to revisit the current plan, and my hope is that the strength of feeling shown by residents in South West Devon, south Devon, and across the county, will result in a meeting with Ministers to discuss a way forward that benefits the whole county, with local services that we can all be proud of, and that do not create a two-tier Devon of urban versus rural.

Following is the full text of the petition:

[The petition of residents of the constituency of South West Devon and the surrounding area,

Declares that the Government's proposals for the reorganisation of local government in the county of Devon have not adequately taken account of local viewpoints; further declares that it will lead to a democratic deficit for rural areas, introduces a rural council area that is too large to effectively administer, will lead to a disparity between total council tax bills for rural compared to urban areas as parish precepts will continue to be charged for rural areas, will result in the prioritisation of urban needs over those of rural areas, and will represent a loss of identity for long-established rural communities.

The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to abandon its plans for local government reorganisation in the county of Devon.

And the petitioners remain, etc.]

[P003232]

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

Happy birthday to you for yesterday, Madam Deputy Speaker.

I rise to present a petition on behalf of hundreds of local people in Newcastle-under-Lyme who, like me, want a direct train connection between Stoke-on-Trent railway station and Manchester airport—a connection that will benefit constituents not just in Newcastle-under-Lyme but across Staffordshire, as can be seen by my colleagues who are here this evening.

The petition states:

The petition of residents of the constituency of Newcastle-under-Lyme,

Declares that there is growing concern amongst residents and businesses about the poor connectivity between North Staffordshire and Manchester airport; notes that local people travelling to Manchester airport by rail must currently travel via Manchester Piccadilly on a train that passes the airport; further notes that the current reliance on a connection through Manchester Piccadilly risks a delayed journey, is inconvenient for bigger families with lots of luggage to carry, for older people, and for those who have mobility issues; further declares that too many people are forced to rely on a taxi which is often more expensive and is at the mercy of the M6, the A500 and the A34; further declares that a direct connection between Stoke-on-Trent and Manchester airport would be good for inward investment to this area, including for jobs for local people; further declares that a direct train connection will also help to ensure that Keele University and all the excellent businesses based at Keele Business Park are able to remain competitive with their rivals in other parts of our United Kingdom; and further notes the decision of August 2026 to confirm the roll-out of such a direct connection.

The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Government, the relevant train companies and the relevant local authorities to successfully and speedily deliver the direct train line connection for passengers who live learn and work in North Staffordshire between Stoke-on-Trent railway station and Manchester airport.

And the petitioners remain, etc.

[P003233]