Rural Railway Stations: Step Free Access

Debate between Chris Hinchliff and Helen Morgan

Tuesday 11th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Helen Morgan]

My hon. Friend is right: there should be more transparency, but there also needs to be more attention to the issue of step-free access in rural areas. I am about to come on to that in more detail.

Improving the accessibility of Whitchurch station will bring more people to the town via rail. That obviously could boost tourism—Whitchurch is Shropshire’s oldest continuously occupied town and is well worth a visit, along with the other beautiful and historic towns in my constituency—and bring customers to local businesses, workers to job vacancies, critically, and families to their loved ones.

Rural towns and villages have been consistently deprioritised by successive Governments and this Government, I am afraid, are no better, continually focusing investment into mayoral combined authorities’ coffers. Those areas do not face the same fundamental issues that rural areas do. They have regular buses that come within minutes, even on Sundays, and train services that are more frequent than every two hours. If people choose to drive, they can do so without the risk of damaging their tyres because they have bumped into a huge pothole. In a town like Whitchurch, if the bus turns up the round trip to someone’s destination is likely to be more than two hours—even if it is only to Shrewsbury, which is 20 miles away. Investment like the Access for All scheme in rural areas is part of the solution to improving economic growth—to more businesses thriving, more people spending and more money flowing into our economy.

[Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)]

What the hon. Lady is describing sounds very familiar to the market town of Baldock in my constituency of North East Hertfordshire. Baldock is due to double in size, but does not have any step-free access. Would she join me in urging the Minister to ensure that rapidly growing rural communities receive a fair share of infrastructure funding?

[Helen Morgan]

The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. Whitchurch, like, I would imagine, many of the towns mentioned in today’s debate, has seen a huge amount of development. The criteria that might have been applied for step-free access some years back probably need reassessing now, because far more people are living there.

The investment would help revitalise our market town high streets, which have withered after years of the previous Conservative Government’s taking rural areas for granted. This Labour Government need to acknowledge the importance of rural parts of the country because they risk pushing the urban-rural divide to breaking point. I welcome the £373 million scheme to deliver Access for All projects over the next five years on a £70 million annual rolling basis, but it is key that that money is distributed to places where access to the railway network is currently poor and where it will have the most impact.

The only criteria that we could find for the provision of step-free access to railway stations come from joint code of practice created by the Department for Transport and Transport Scotland in 2015—a decade ago. It recommends that

“stations that have a daily passenger flow of 1000 passengers or less…are not required to have lifts or ramps”

if a station within 50 km of the same route provides a step-free route. I am sorry, but once someone has got in their car and driven 30 miles to access a step-free station, they may as well drive the rest of the way—I certainly would; that completely negates the point of public transport. Will the Minister please set out whether his Department intends to update those outdated and ineffective criteria to ensure that rural areas are not left forever without accessible stations?

Of course, I understand that installing accessibility upgrades for urban stations may reach more people, but the people there already have other forms of accessible transport, often as well as a usable taxi service. In an area such as Shropshire, that is often not the case. If the Government want to achieve their mission of stimulating growth across the whole country, they should ensure that everyone has proper access to public transport, not just those people who are lucky enough to live in an urban area. I hope that the Minister will ensure that the needs of our rural areas are understood and prioritised to turn the tide on decades of persistent under-investment in public transport and take the first step to making the railway step-free in rural areas, and especially in Whitchurch in North Shropshire.

Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Debate between Chris Hinchliff and Helen Morgan

Report stage
Wednesday 10th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Helen Morgan]

I am broadly supportive of the Bill, because I think it will do that. My point is that the power to franchise bus services is all very well, but the funding needs to follow the power. Otherwise, constituencies such as mine will not see the improvements for which they are desperate.

Colleagues have talked about the bus fare cap. I am supportive of measures to keep it at £2, but I must point out that in constituencies such as mine, which has little in the way of bus services, a cap has not made a huge difference. Some of the operators have not opted into that cap, so it has had limited impact for my constituents, important as it is.

The £1 billion fund announced by the Department for Transport last November promised to give rural and coastal areas a real sea change in their bus services, but in Shropshire—as I mentioned, it has had the worst drop-off in its services in the whole country—only £2.5 million was allocated. That is the critical point and why I am fully supportive of the Bill’s measures that will allow local authorities to decide where bus services are essential. The funding needs to follow them, regardless of whether areas are in a combined authority or have a mayor, and it should follow need, not just structure. I urge the Minister to take that on board.

Although we are not voting on new clause 37, across the House, including on the Government Benches, 30 Members have sponsored it. Many similar amendments have been tabled that likewise seek to improve bus services for people living in rural areas, and ensure they are adequate to access essential services. I urge the Minister to consider the intentions of my new clause, and those of similar amendments tabled by colleagues, and commit to some kind of improvement for rural areas when he makes his closing remarks.

I mentioned that North Shropshire is pressed up against the border with Wales and that the border with Wales is very wiggly. That gives my constituents a specific challenge with their bus passes. If they want to catch a bus between two destinations in England but it stops in Wales or they need to change in Wales, their bus pass is not valid. I think that is a bit crazy. For example, if they want to go from Oswestry to Chester and they need to change at Wrexham, their bus pass will not be valid. That is the one service that runs on a Sunday. We need to ensure that people can use their bus passes when they are crossing the border. That is a very low-cost thing, which ought to be very easy for a Government to sort out. My new clause 39 would require the Secretary of State to liaise with the Welsh Government and come up with a workable solution for what is probably an unintended consequence of devolution between England and Wales. I hope the Minister will take that on board and consider a workable solution for people using their bus passes across the border.

I also tabled new clause 40, which replicates that requirement for Scotland. I appreciate that that does not impact my constituents in North Shropshire, but I tabled it in the name of being inclusive.

I am proud to have been one of the first signatories to new clause 2, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon). I will not take any of the credit for the new clause because he has done all the hard work, but I will urge the Minister to consider accepting new clause 2 because it is so important. Disability does not stop at 9.30.

[Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Ind)]

I speak in support of the Bill and in favour of new clause 22 in my name.

We can now say in complete confidence that the privatisation and deregulation of our bus services has been a catastrophic failure for rural towns and villages such as those across North East Hertfordshire. Decades of dogmatic adherence to flawed ideology has created vast public transport deserts where residents have no meaningful alternative to driving a car. The consequent social costs of this failure have been profound: more and more traffic that stifles our communities and chokes our rivers and air with life-limiting pollution; young people cut off from education and employment, forced to leave their homes to get on in life; and our elderly trapped in loneliness and isolation, which should be a source of shame for our entire nation. The privatisation disaster means for those unable to drive or afford a car, a connected life in rural England is practically impossible.

I welcome many of the clauses in the Bill that together offer a chance to reverse the hollowing out of our villages which threatens to end centuries of cultural and economic vibrancy. We need a bus network that comprehensively meets the needs of every community, especially for rural areas that lost their train stations in the Beeching cuts, including Buntingford, Westmill, Braughing, and Standon in my constituency. That is why I have tabled new clause 22, which would empower Ministers to conduct a review into the delivery of guaranteed minimum bus service standards for every community with more than 300 residents across England.

During the progress of the Bill, I ran a survey on the experience of my constituents of their local bus services. Hundreds of residents responded and a massive, if unsurprising, 83% of them felt that the bus services available do not offer a viable alternative to owning and driving a car. As I am sure you can imagine, Madam Deputy Speaker, whether via the survey or in community meetings, my constituents have been none too shy in sharing their thoughts about the quality, reliability and general usefulness of local bus services. Consequently, it is completely clear to me that voters in North East Hertfordshire are utterly fed up with a bus network based on profitability for shareholders rather than public need. The measures in the Bill to address that with a long-overdue strengthening of socially necessary bus services are very welcome.

However, to succeed in meeting the hopes of communities such as those that I represent, we should go further and move towards a universal basic right to public transport with enshrined service standards across the country, replacing the threadbare, patchwork and inadequate network left by deregulation. Although it may be difficult to imagine, given the current state of public transport in our nation, that is, in fact, something that other countries are quite happily doing already. In Switzerland, the region of Zurich guarantees villages of 300 people or more at least an hourly bus service running seven days a week from 6 am to midnight, linking rural residents to regional facilities for employment, education, training, shopping and leisure, while North Hesse in Germany has a target of bus services reaching every village across the region every hour.