Transport Connectivity: North-west England Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateAndrew Murrison
Main Page: Andrew Murrison (Conservative - South West Wiltshire)Department Debates - View all Andrew Murrison's debates with the Department for Transport
(2 days, 20 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It would be good if other contributions could be similarly brief, to allow as many colleagues as possible to speak.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt) on securing this crucial debate on transport connectivity in the north-west—an issue that impacts the day-to-day lives of many of my constituents and people across the whole region.
Our region has historically been neglected when it comes to transport, but I want to begin with a positive: I reiterate my wholehearted support for the electrification of the Bolton to Wigan train line, properly funded under this Labour Government. I also welcome the extension of the excellent Greater Manchester Bee network out towards my constituency.
Given that other Members have spoken so eloquently about planes, trains and automobiles, I will focus on a particular issue in my Bolton West constituency: the Hulton Park housing development. Hulton Park is a significant development, but it suffers from a critical oversight: a complete lack of sustainable transport options. Local public transport links are virtually non-existent. That will force future residents to rely almost entirely on cars and will snarl up the already overly congested roads for my constituents.
I am sure colleagues agree that we should not rubber-stamp major housing projects without properly considering how people will get to work and school and access sustainable essential services locally in a convenient manner. In Bolton West, we already have severe congestion at Four Lane Ends in Hulton, where traffic bottlenecks daily and pedestrian facilities are extremely limited. The recent proposal for two additional housing developments in Leigh, one of which is particularly large, will only compound the issue.
To be clear, I wholeheartedly support the Government’s housing plans, which are necessary given that the previous Tory Government sat on their hands for 14 years. We have built 4.3 million fewer homes than comparable countries since the second world war, and house prices are now 8.3 times the average income, pricing many of my constituents out of home ownership, but we must strive to deliver those new homes in a way that does not force residents into car dependency and exacerbate existing congestion issues. For me, the Hulton Park development is emblematic of a broader failure to link transport planning, house building and, crucially, economic growth.
We must ensure that new developments are served by cycle, pedestrian, bus, rail and tram networks from the outset, rather than as an afterthought. We should be planning how to mitigate existing congestion before spades are in the ground. This is about more than convenience; it is about the future of our towns and our cities. It is about delivering economic growth by ensuring connectivity between new developments and workplaces. It is about reducing emissions, improving air quality and ensuring that everyone has fair access to transport. I urge the Minister: let us not only build the homes that we need but build them with the infrastructure they deserve.
Well done, everybody; all Members have got in. I call the Lib Dem spokesman, Tim Farron.
May I point out that there were many more railway lines then, and therefore more trains to be slow? It was also mostly pre-electricity—so there we go. I am grateful for the hon. Member’s point.
The industrial capability of the west coast of Cumbria—not in my constituency—is significant to the economy of the whole country, and includes BAE at Barrow and Sellafield on the west coast. The railway line that serves them—the Furness line—saw a derailment a year ago and a flooding-related near disaster just a few weeks ago. We need to pay special attention to keeping the Furness line open, upgrading it and electrifying it if possible. I also want to make a case, on behalf of all my Cumbrian colleagues, for the Cumbria coastal line, which needs significant investment.
It is great to hear colleagues from metropolitan parts of the north-west talk about keeping the £2 bus fare cap, but for many of us in areas that are far less well funded, and where devolution has not really happened, such as Cumbria, we are stuck with the £3 cap, and we are worried about that being got rid of altogether. Before the cap came in, the most expensive bus journey in the United Kingdom was Kendal to Ambleside, which cost more than an hour’s wage for somebody working in the hospitality sector. Will the Minister confirm that the £3 cap will not be raised or got rid of any time soon?
It is my great privilege to represent a very rural area, but that means that even when the £3 cap exists, it is of no good whatsoever. It does a fat lot of good if we do not have any buses. Giving our local authority, Westmorland and Furness council, the ability to run its own buses is key to meeting the needs of many rural communities. I am honoured to chair an outfit called Cumbria Better Connected, to which all these issues are regularly fed in. One of the most important issues is connectivity and integration between bus and rail, but it is no—
Their concerns were wrong. I had a minor position in the Treasury at the time, and I can assure the hon. Lady that that was genuine redirection of funds, albeit over a period, as one would expect, with the release of funds associated with the development of HS2 in the northern sector.
To conclude the list, we had £3.3 billion for road improvements and an additional £11.5 billion for Northern Powerhouse Rail from Manchester to Liverpool. The question that is easy to miss in opposition but impossible to avoid in government is this: where do the Government want money to be spent? That money could be used for those widespread improvements or be rediverted to a northern branch of a version of HS2, but it is impossible to spend the same money twice. If the Minister wants to do both, where is the money going to come from?
Finally, many hon. Members referred to the seeming disconnect between investment decisions in London and the south-east and elsewhere in the country, the north-west in particular. The hon. Member for Leigh and Atherton used a good phrase:
“Growth goes where the growth already is.”
The previous Government at least took the first step in tackling an injustice in the Green Book analysis. That was undertaken to unlock some of the levelling-up investment that the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) referred to. I am concerned that the new Government—certainly the new Treasury—are reverting to type. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer had her growth panic a few weeks ago—