Road Safety: Young Drivers

Anna Sabine Excerpts

Tuesday 28th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Julia Buckley) for calling this important debate. That is an incredibly difficult speech to follow, and I am feeling very emotional. I also thank all the families here today.

I have two teenage children, one of whom is now 18, and he is about to learn to drive. It is really helpful if young people in my constituency can drive themselves around, because—especially in villages such as the one he lives in—they are often at the mercy of unreliable and infrequent bus services. As his mum, I am of course encouraging him to learn: he will be able to be more independent, and it is an important life skill. But I have some really serious concerns about his safety when he starts to drive.

My constituency has a lot of A roads that are windy and fast, and they often have junctions off to the side, from which drivers are trying to pull out on to the main road. We have a history of accidents in the local area, including a horrendous one in 2023, when two young sisters were killed by an oncoming vehicle driven by someone who was high on drugs. That accident took place on a very dangerous junction outside Frome, and I am campaigning for traffic lights to be installed there, but I am coming up against a lack of council or Government funding to get the new infrastructure installed. We cannot put in the preventive measures my hon. Friend the Member for Hazel Grove (Lisa Smart) mentioned if we cannot fund them.

We know from figures provided by Brake that one in five drivers crash within a year of their test, and more than 1,500 young drivers are killed or injured on the roads each year. We know that carrying passengers or driving at night are major risk factors for younger drivers. I certainly remember careering around the roads where I grew up as a teenager, in cars packed with friends, listening to music too loudly. The thought makes me shudder when I look back on it.

Sadly, we also know that younger drivers are more likely to be involved in a crash caused by speed. Serious consideration needs to be given to graduated driving licences.

[Robin Swann]

I thank the hon. Member for Shrewsbury (Julia Buckley) for securing the debate. In Northern Ireland, we still have restricted driving, where a newly qualified driver must display an R plate and is restricted to 45 mph for one year after passing their test. Not everything has to be new; there are places where restrictions are working along the lines of the graduated scheme suggested by the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine).

[Anna Sabine]

That is exactly right. I am keen that when we discuss this issue, we look at good practice from other places.

Graduated driving licences can be set up in a number of ways, but typically might involve minimum periods for learning to drive, and reducing the number of passengers a young person can have in the car. In the UK, we already have a version of this system for motorbikes. We recognise that young motorcyclists probably should not ride the most powerful bikes straightaway, and we restrict them accordingly. Even motoring groups such as the RAC have supported moves towards a graduated driving licence scheme in recent times, and I intend to explore the idea in my own political party.

I totally understand why young people might resist or resent the idea of graduated driving licences. I can also see why, in rural areas such as mine or that of the hon. Member for Shrewsbury, really stringent restrictions on driving—such as preventing young people from driving at night—might make it hard for them to get to their jobs or educational settings if buses are not frequent enough. But I think the idea warrants a conversation, because young people have the most to lose if we cannot get this right.

--- Later in debate ---

[Greg Smith]

It is important that we look at all evidence suggesting a problem and explore the basis for solving it, but I am no fan of knee-jerk legislation. This House is at its worst when we jump to knee-jerk solutions to any problem presented. It is important to look at all the evidence, practical outcomes and potential unintended consequences. The case that the hon. Gentleman raises and the point that he makes are important and should be looked at—as he referenced, it is being looked at by the DVLA at the moment. I would be interested to hear the Minister’s response to that point.

I double-underline that we should bear in mind that every death on our roads is a tragedy, but there has been significant improvement in road safety over recent years.

[Anna Sabine]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Greg Smith]

I will just expand this point and then give way to the hon. Lady. Since road user casualties peaked in 1965, with nearly 8,000 deaths, there has been a concerted efforts to reduce the numbers. Thankfully, that effort has largely been successful, across successive Governments of all political persuasions.

According to Department for Transport figures, released in September last year, Great Britain ranked third out of 33 countries reported on in 2023 for the lowest number of road fatalities per million of the population. Of course, that number is still too high, but the direction of travel is positive, and we need to take further action—

[Greg Smith]

I promised to give way to the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), and will just finish this point. Mindful of time, I may then take one or two more interventions.

Although the claim of a 13% fall in casualties accurately reflects the raw data between 2010 and 2023, it fails to account for the context of vehicle miles, which have significantly increased. During that time, the number of vehicle miles increased from 306 billion to 334 billion. When adjusted to that context, the Department’s data indicates a decrease in the casualty rate from 681 casualties per billion vehicle miles in 2010 to 398 in 2023, which is a 41% reduction. I repeat that we must still take action to get the number down to zero, but the direction of travel has been good.

[Anna Sabine]

The hon. Gentleman mentioned the personal tragedies of road accidents and refers to Members of all political persuasions. Does he agree that it is brilliant to see cross-party support for these campaigns, but that it might be more helpful for campaigners if His Majesty’s Opposition were better represented in today’s debate?

[Greg Smith]

I hesitate to go there, on what is a political point. When we are having a serious debate, comments like that are not necessarily helpful to the spirit of trying to engender cross-party working.

I have a history of looking at this subject, including with the Minister for the future of roads. In the previous Parliament, we both served on the Transport Committee, which conducted a deep inquiry into novice and young drivers and the implications for safety. We looked carefully at graduated driving licences and other things, such as the Under 17 Car Club, which was referred to earlier, and which I am a huge fan of. I am a huge fan of trying to get young people—potentially very young people—in an off-road, safe, private-land setting and starting to understand how to drive and control a vehicle safely.

<Railway Services: South-West>

Anna Sabine Excerpts

Tuesday 14th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Martin Wrigley]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: we need more services on all these lines to support our constituents.

However, everything I have outlined will be interrupted by the creation of the HS2 link to Old Oak Common. High-speed rail is a welcome improvement to our nation’s infrastructure, but the implementation of that project has been handled poorly in the past. It has ignored the largest benefit—connections within the northern powerhouse—and the focus on delivering faster rail between London and Birmingham has delivered unwanted side effects. The decision to terminate the HS2 services at Old Oak Common, three miles west of Paddington, was quickly overturned by the incoming Government. Their announcement of a resumption of the project to tunnel to Euston is to be welcomed, but the 14-platform station at Old Oak Common—eight platforms on the surface and six for HS2 underground—will impact south-west rail services for another six or seven years as it is constructed.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

My constituents in Frome and East Somerset are still shocked to learn about the implications of Old Oak Common. Does my hon. Friend agree that the consultation on that huge change, which will have a major impact on the south-west, was insufficient, and that we still need to have some kind of impact survey or study of the potential impact on tourism and business and the other effects of the works at Old Oak Common?

[Martin Wrigley]

I agree entirely that the impact of Old Oak Common is immense, and will not be just during the construction phase.

The six or seven years of delays and cancellations at weekends and Christmases have been covered in this Chamber before, so I will not repeat the list of weeks and weeks of diversions to Euston and significantly reduced services.

I have already started to receive complaints from my constituents about the inability of Euston station to cope with the volume of passengers when the trains cannot complete their journeys to Paddington. But the piece of the plan that adds insult to injury for the millions of passengers from the south-west, is the idea that every Great Western Railway train will stop at Old Oak Common, even after construction is completed. It has been somewhat unclear—some misleading averages have been quoted—but having met with GWR and Network Rail, I understand that stopping at Old Oak Common will add some five to 15 minutes to every single journey. Adding 15 minutes on to the fast train—of around two hours—from Exeter to London is significant, and even more so on the quicker trains from Cheltenham or Bristol.

Travel to Birmingham is already available via Bristol. Looking at journey times, it will usually be faster to go to Birmingham via Bristol, unless users are further east than Swindon or Westbury. Stopping at Old Oak Common will bring little or no benefit to the majority of the long-distance rail users of the west, south-west and Wales.

Can the Minister confirm that fast trains from the south-west should be able to go through Old Oak Common without stopping?

Old Oak Common Station

Anna Sabine Excerpts

Tuesday 17th December 2024 Westminster Hall

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

I am pleased to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for securing this important debate.

As we have heard, the work at Old Oak Common will be hugely impactful on the south-west for at least the next seven years. A month from work starting, however, councils, MPs, businesses and interest groups are only just being notified of the impact on services. That is a totally unacceptable approach to public consultation. This work is meant to last for seven years or more. For us in Frome and East Somerset, it follows 10 years of disruption to our rail services from the electrification of the main line and the construction of the Elizabeth line. The new project will affect approximately 56 million passenger journeys a year through Paddington and will push people on to other lines, such as South Western Railway, which cannot handle the passengers it has at the moment, let alone the numbers it would need to handle to avoid disruption.

My constituents have been left in the dark about how the project will affect them. There has been little to no consultation with local businesses or groups about the disruption. That is unacceptable. This Christmas, our railways are already being delayed thanks to essential work happening in Westbury, leaving many struggling to get from Frome to London. Furthermore, many people and businesses relocated to places like Frome and East Somerset during covid, partly based on the time and regularity of services. They will not have been aware of the plans when they made that decision.

The Prime Minister’s response to the hon. Member for Exmouth and Exeter East (David Reed) at Prime Minister’s questions on 27 November was welcome, but his comments that services are unaffected between Exeter and London Euston show his lack of understanding of the situation. Many of my constituents use Bath Spa station. The train from Exeter does not run through it, and it travels through Frome a maximum of twice a day. We are lucky that we have a stop on a main line, but many people will not even have access to that.

The planned work will leave the south-west with some of the slowest inter-city services in the country. It will severely reduce the number of trains running and the number of seats available. It will be a direct hit on the economies of the south-west and Wales; it will affect people not only now, but far into the future, as they adapt their investment and business decisions accordingly. We already have unreliable services with frankly rubbish wi-fi and mobile signal, which hampers people’s ability to work on the train. Millions of passengers will be displaced as a result of the work, which will increase journeys on roads and push services to other stations. Regular users of the M4 and M5 will dread the prospect of more cars on those motorways, particularly at weekends.

No one is denying that the work needs to happen or is going to happen. However, it seems that there has been little to no consideration of the impact on the south-west. I urge the Government to look into a programme of measures, many of which were brilliantly set out by my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham, that would mitigate the impact of the disruption caused by Old Oak Common and ensure that the south-west is not being left behind.

Rural Bus Services

Anna Sabine Excerpts

Wednesday 11th September 2024 Westminster Hall

[Sarah Dyke]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. I absolutely agree that collaboration with contiguous authorities is crucial. We must also provide confidence in bus services to increase footfall and make them more sustainable. I would like to thank the Somerset Bus Partnership for all the work it does to promote bus travel in my county.

In Glastonbury and Somerton, and across Somerset, we are facing a near-constant annual cycle where bus routes are threatened with closure and changes. Every year, the council and bus companies negotiate to come to an agreement to keep the route open for another year. If an agreement is reached, the bus route is saved for a whole cycle of events, until that cycle of events starts again, as a contract comes up for renewal a year later.

Earlier this year, I campaigned to save the 54, 58, 58A, 25 and 28 bus routes, which run through my constituency. Thankfully, Somerset council and First Bus South were able to reach an agreement to keep the routes, but some have had timetable changes imposed on them. Inevitably, some of those routes will be under threat yet again when the agreement needs renewal later this year. That is simply unsustainable.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

The reintroduction of funding for the Trowbridge to Bath bus service by Bath and North East Somerset council was vital for villages such as Freshford in my constituency. Does my hon. Friend agree that cash-strapped local councils are going to need confirmed, long-term funding commitments to help support those vital services?

[Sarah Dyke]

I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. I could not agree more; it is crucial that local authorities are given the funding they need to provide these essential services. Local authorities are once again currently waiting for further information regarding the future of various sources of funding they receive from central Government. I submitted a written question to the new Government in July regarding the future of the bus service improvement plan and BSIP Phase 2 funds. While the response affirmed a commitment to improving bus services as part of their growth mission, it failed to provide specific details of plans.

Rural areas desperately need to see plans and to have those assurances of how vital services can continue to run. Earlier this week, the Government laid forward a statutory instrument that opened up bus franchising for all local authorities in England. I welcome the Government’s ambition to fix the country’s broken buses, but they must understand that bus services outside urban areas face different problems.

Bus Franchising

Anna Sabine Excerpts

Monday 9th September 2024 Commons Chamber

[Simon Lightwood]

I completely agree. This is fundamental to the work we have been pursuing to make franchising quicker and simpler, and to avoid the need for local transport authorities to spend their time filling in forms at great expense. Britain is one of the few places in the developed world that hands operators power to slash bus services and set fares with very little say for the communities that depend on those services. Decades of failed regulation have left communities with little say on the essential services on which they rely, and we are determined to change that.

[Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)]

As my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) said, the Lib Dems broadly welcome the principle of this statement, as I think will the Somerset Bus Partnership. The volunteers of this fantastic organisation in my constituency work tirelessly to encourage people to use buses. Somerset council is facing an historic funding crisis and has narrowly avoided bankruptcy, so I am keen to understand how the Government will provide long-term funding so that such authorities can do the franchising that has been promised.