Oral Answers to Questions

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Thursday 12th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

I appreciate the measures that the Minister has outlined, because this is a really important issue. Many of my constituents have written to me about unacceptable waiting times and mark-ups on driving test slots. One constituent depends on their licence to complete their qualifications and get a job, but cannot secure a test without paying 10 times the standard rate. What is the Minister doing to ensure that those who are continuing to charge rip-off rates for driving tests are being held accountable?

[Lilian Greenwood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right; it is completely unacceptable that some unscrupulous people are exploiting learner drivers. That is precisely why we are changing the booking system to block those people from using it and taking action against driving instructors who misuse their access to the system.

Leagrave Station: Step-free Access

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Monday 9th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

I must confess that this is my first Adjournment debate, and I am gutted that the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) is not here to intervene. Is it an Adjournment debate if he has not done so? Probably not.

I wish I could carry on in that jovial tone, but unfortunately I cannot. We all hate being let down—frankly, I think many of us have been let down quite a lot this week—but especially when we are led to believe that a problem is about to be fixed, only to have the rug pulled from beneath our feet. Thousands of users of Leagrave station in my constituency felt a huge sigh of relief, and thousands more would-be users who currently cannot use the station felt hope, when they were told just before the election that we were successful in gaining Access for All funding for Leagrave station—the funding, which is vital for our needs as a community, was for lifts at the station—only to have this cruelly snatched away from us when we found out that there was no money for the scheme and there never had been. To put it bluntly, we were lied to as a community, but people in Luton North do not give up, and we want to know what the reasoning was for the lack of progression via the Access for All routes funding. When and how can we work with the new Government to make progress on securing lifts at Leagrave station?

Leagrave station is a major transport hub for our town. Nearly 1.5 million journeys are made to and from the station every year. I do not begrudge the stations that were approved for Access for All funding—I am very pleased for them. I would love to live in hope that, before I am entirely grey, we will see all stations in every community entirely accessible for all, but I do wonder why it is that many of those stations that were approved for funding actually have fewer journeys than Leagrave station.

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

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for giving way. This is an important debate. If she has been following the proceedings of the Public Bill Committee for the Railways Bill, she will have heard that at the current rate it will take more than 100 years to get step-free access across the full estate. Does she agree with the Opposition in this instance that that is too long?

[Sarah Owen]

A rare occasion! I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention and yes, he is right, that is far too long. Not only will I be grey, but I will be dead, so progress is far too slow—[Interruption.]

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Apologies, I was merely commenting that the hon. Lady might not be—longevity is increasing.

[Sarah Owen]

Madam Deputy Speaker, I have good genes, but I would have to have extraordinarily good genes to see that to fruition. The hon. Gentleman makes a really good point. Progress is far too slow. For many people, train journeys are just completely out their reach, and that should not be the limit of our aspirations, quite frankly.

[Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving way in this very important debate. This issue affects constituencies across the country, including mine—we have problems at Weybridge station. May I draw to her attention my new clause 69 to the Railways Bill, which sets out a requirement for an accessibility strategy that the Government have to report on? I have intervened on her now, but I hope to intervene on the Minister later for his comment on that.

[Sarah Owen]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I would want to look at the detail of any amendment along those lines, but yes, in principle we absolutely need a strategy. I think many people would understand that this is not something where we click our fingers and it happens overnight, but we need to be travelling on this journey together—excuse the pun—because we cannot be saying that public transport is out of bounds if someone is unable to walk up and down stairs, it is out of bounds for a parent with a pushchair, or it is out of bounds if someone has an unruly child, as I do, who does not necessarily do as they are told, and they are absolutely terrified of using the stairs. In many cases, those staircases, as I will come on to talk about, are in utter disrepair and in a shocking state.

In Luton North we can take advantage of our close links to the capital to travel to work, see friends and family, or head to the airport on holiday. Some people do have holidays—not necessarily all of us—and many people use Luton airport to go on holiday, travel to work, and see friends and loved ones. We should be enabling everybody, not just those travelling from London on Thameslink, but those travelling from Bedford and every station in between, to go to Luton airport by train.

For anyone who cannot use stairs—wheelchair users, or people with heavy luggage, prams or pushchairs—two main platforms cannot be accessed at all. I have to say that it is a sick joke that our station is listed as semi-disabled access friendly, when in fact any train heading north from Leagrave stops at a platform that cannot be accessed step-free. So, if you are coming back from London or heading to Bedford, you have no choice but to use those stairs or a different station. I do not believe that any station that is accessible only on some platforms can be called accessible in any description whatsoever.

I have been campaigning to get lifts at Leagrave station since I was first elected in 2019, and then heavily pregnant with my daughter. When she was born, like every other parent who uses Leagrave station, I tackled those steep steps with a pram. There was always a member of the public there willing to help, because that is just how Luton is, but we should not have to rely on the kindness of strangers to ensure that we can get our children up and down those stairs safely. Then, when she was a toddler, as I described, I nervously held her hand up and down those really dangerous stairs. I see parents do that every day, battling with those unsafe stairs, to the extent that I took the former Rail Minister to see Leagrave station for himself. He was shocked to see the state of it. I also took my child with me so that he could see how impossible it is to navigate safely for someone with a pram, a small child or any difficulty with accessibility whatsoever.

There were moments of hope, and I thought we had made progress. However, I have to say that I reflect every single constituent in Luton North in being incredibly frustrated with being so close to seeing lifts at Leagrave station, only to have that cruelly snatched away from us. I understand that there are financial pressures facing the Government, but people in Luton North deserve an accessible railway, so I have some questions for the Minister.

Since 2019, I have pushed successive Governments on this issue. I hosted Huw Merriman, the former Rail Minister, and secured a Network Rail feasibility study into lifts, which was carried out in 2023. The study, which required significant investment from the council, went into huge detail on the exact design needed to deliver lifts at the station. In May 2024, the Conservative Government announced that Leagrave had been approved for Access for All funding, but now we have discovered that the money never existed and the projects were never properly funded. Can the Minister tell me, Luton council and my constituents why the existence of this major feasibility study does not seem to have factored in the final decision not to advance Leagrave station in this stage of AfA funding?

I understand also that the decision on whether to advance stations was made on the basis of the availability of third-party funding. Leagrave serves a large community but, unlike more affluent areas, it does not benefit from a single large business or wealthy potential sponsors in its vicinity. Discussions with third-party supporters are ongoing, but I would welcome further collaboration with the Minister and his Department on how we can facilitate those negotiations.

The Equality Act 2010 and the public sector equality duty both put duties on Network Rail and train companies to ensure that people with disabilities are able to access the railway. The Government are encouraging people with disabilities into work but are making a major way of accessing employment inaccessible for people who want to get to work. How does that square with our Labour Government’s priorities of ensuring that people who want to work can physically get into work in the same way as everyone else?

Currently, anyone coming from the south who needs step-free access to Leagrave station must call ahead to book a taxi from Luton Airport Parkway, meaning that what is seven minutes on the train could become 45 minutes in Luton traffic—I kid you not, Minister: getting in a car to drive from one end of Luton to the other, instead of taking the train, can take up to an hour in heavy traffic. While Luton is famous for many wonderful things, including our football team, our traffic congestion is possibly what I am least happy for it be famous for. Network Rail and Thameslink do their best to facilitate arrangements for disabled passengers, but, as I am sure the Minister will agree, this is not ideal in terms of either the cost for passengers or the length of travel time.

There are lots of positive reasons why Leagrave station should be invested in, given all the opportunities that this Government are presenting to our town. We are part of the Oxford-Cambridge growth arc and will soon have Universal Studios in Bedford, although I will not be going on any of the rollercoasters—I would just be happy to get on an accessible train, to be honest. We also have the Luton airport expansion and Goodman taking over the Vauxhall site. All of these are positive markers for investment in our town, but local people have to feel the investment for themselves, too. The Minister present is the Minister for Aviation, so can he tell me how he hopes to achieve Luton airport’s expansion goals for public transport use if the north of our town cannot access the airport step-free? Can he also say when, if we had match funding tomorrow, would be the earliest date we could get spades in the ground?

To conclude, I am not giving up on campaigning for lifts at Leagrave station—I will continue banging on about this every time I visit the station and it is not as good as the people of Luton North deserve. I know the Minister will understand that I must continue to push for my constituents to get the step-free access they deserve. I am nothing but persistent.

It is welcome that the Government are putting money into communities such as ours in Luton North. Between the Pride in Place funding, a fairer council settlement, big projects such as the airport expansion and Universal Studios, Luton is now getting the love we have not had for a long time. However, that is also why it is so important that we follow through on projects such as lifts for Leagrave—to show residents in areas like mine that towns like Luton deserve investment in our transport and infrastructure. I look forward to continuing to work with the Department for Transport over the next few years to ensure that we get the step-free access that my constituents deserve.

--- Later in debate ---

[Keir Mather]

The hon. Member pre-empts me, as I will turn to how this particular issue to do with the rail service intersects with the needs of the aviation sector. He is of course right to point to the fact that surface access must play a really important role in the considerations around how we grow our aviation sector in a way that is sustainable but meets the accessibility requirements of which he and my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North spoke so powerfully.

It is reasonable that organisations and developments that benefit directly from improved step-free access—such as local authorities, major employers, developers and transport hubs, including Luton airport—should play a role in contributing to their delivery. Even partial local funding would significantly strengthen a future case for accessibility upgrades at Leagrave station and demonstrate shared local commitment to the scheme.

[Sarah Owen]

I thank the Minister for noting how important Luton airport is to our wider community. Would he be open to facilitating greater collaboration between the Department, Luton airport and our railways to ensure that we see greater surface travel through public transport and our railways?

[Keir Mather]

Absolutely. The Government want to realise the benefits of the aviation sector—its economic potential, but also, as my hon. Friend pointed to so powerfully as it pertains to rail, the human benefit of being able to be connected to loved ones and to access new places. The two things need to work in tandem. I would be glad to engage in those conversations further.

Local partners are also encouraged to develop a local funding package, drawing on opportunities such as section 106 developer contributions and city region sustainable transport settlements. These can be used to match-fund Access for All projects and are another way to bring forward accessibility projects. Further detail on this matter is set out in the written ministerial statement published on 15 January 2026.

I recognise that this decision will be disappointing to my hon. Friend and her constituents; however, funding for future rounds of Access for All may be available as part of the next spending review. That could provide an opportunity to fund accessibility upgrades at Leagrave station. Positive accessibility work is already under way in the neighbouring constituency of Luton South and South Bedfordshire. At Luton station, an Access for All project is currently under construction, which will provide step-free access across the station and make a tangible difference for passengers. Nearby Luton Airport Parkway also provides full step-free access to all platforms, less than a 20-minute drive from Leagrave station.

[Sarah Owen]

rose—

[Keir Mather]

However, we have heard powerfully from my hon. Friend about how dealing with Luton traffic is a key barrier to people accessing those accessibility benefits. I will give way to her to add some further context.

[Sarah Owen]

If anybody can get from the north of Leagrave to Luton Airport Parkway in 20 minutes, they must be travelling in some vehicle that I have never travelled in, because it will take at least half an hour to 45 minutes in bad traffic. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) is really pleased, as are many of us in the town, to finally see work taking place in Luton South, but it has been over 10 years in the making. Please can the Minister tell me that it will not be over 10 years until Leagrave sees the same?

[Keir Mather]

My hon. Friend is right to enlighten me as to the reality of motoring your way through Luton to access certain areas. She sets me a formidable challenge, which I dare not take on, given her advice. Likewise, I congratulate and respect the work of my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) on securing those improvements. My hon. Friend the Member for Luton North is right to point to the fact that the people in her constituency who need to benefit from that accessibility at their doorstep need those improvements to come faster and further. That is why, through Great British Railways and the work we are progressing through the Railways Bill, as well as through the next spending review and other ongoing work, we hope to ensure that those accessibility improvements are available to people across the country. I can understand her impatience and I thank her for it, because it keeps our feet held to the fire.

Railways Bill

Sarah Owen Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 9th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Holden]

We can all see the ideology at play today. I think the hon. Gentleman’s constituency is in Greater Manchester, where the mayor is calling for a concessionary model—a partnership between the state and the private sector that is directly opposed in the Bill that he will support this evening. The hon. Gentleman is quite far off the mark.

The number of passengers on our railways doubled in the 25 years after services were returned to the private sector after half a century of decline. We support the vital role of open access operators, which always give passengers brand-new routes with cheap, affordable fares, and often run direct services to London. The hon. Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) called for direct services recently, but I do not think that option will be available under the new system. Neither will a direct line from Cleethorpes to London, long campaigned for by my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers)—I visited his constituency a week ago—be on offer.

We back a joined-up approach that places passengers and taxpayers at the heart of our railway. We recognise that fragmentation held our railway back, and have long championed partnership with private sector involvement to drive innovation and growth. That is why we conducted the Williams-Shapps review.

What the Secretary of State has brought forward is not a coherent model at all; it is something altogether different, and ought to trouble Members throughout the House. Her Bill ignores the evidence, the experts, and the fervent cries of freight that growth has to be at the forefront of any rail reform. Instead, in keeping with the worst traditions of the 1970s, a return to state control runs throughout her Bill. It is not about the growth in passenger numbers that would reduce taxpayer subsidy; otherwise, why is that not on the front of the Bill? It is not about the growth in competition that would bring down prices for passengers, the growth of freight that would take more lorries off our roads, or the growth of new routes to serve the length and breadth of the country. Nowhere on the face of her Bill is there a target for passenger growth. The Bill actively works against open access, which, if the Secretary of State gets her way, will be left wholly, and deliberately, vulnerable.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

One area where we can all agree we want to see passenger growth is among those with disabilities and those who find steps incredibly difficult. On 24 May 2024, the previous Government announced that 50 stations, including my local station at Leagrave, would benefit from step-free access, but the funding never existed. How can the shadow Secretary of State criticise our plans, when he made promises about funds that never existed?

[Mr Holden]

The previous Government did a huge amount to improve access to stations throughout the country. I would like to see more of that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Lilian Greenwood]

My hon. Friend is proving a great champion for road users in his constituency. The simple answer to his question is yes. Local authorities already have a legal duty to co-ordinate all works on their network, and utility companies have a duty to co-operate, and we will ensure that they do so.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

6. What steps she is taking to help improve the accessibility of public transport.

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

We are working with industry to deliver a transport network that puts passengers and their needs at its heart. The new aviation accessibility task and finish group, for example, brings together industry and consumer advocates with first-hand experience to improve accessibility in air travel. The Government will take advantage of the benefits of a unified rail network to deliver a more reliable and consistent customer experience for everyone with accessibility needs, and our buses Bill will make bus travel more accessible and inclusive, including by extending the requirements for relevant bus staff to undertake disability training.

[Sarah Owen]

I thank the Minister for his response. Leagrave station in Luton was one of a number granted Access for All funding by the previous Government for long-overdue lifts. However, Network Rail now says that this money was never allocated and that it only qualifies for a business case, despite a feasibility study already being agreed and completed. Those who can make the nearly 2 million journeys from Leagrave station, including myself, are left with a crumbling footbridge that is not accessible for many. Will the Minister offer assurances that Access for All funding to Leagrave station will be honoured, and will he meet me and the Bedfordshire Rail Access Network to establish the quickest path to having lifts at Leagrave station?

[Simon Lightwood]

My hon. Friend is a formidable advocate for this, having raised it numerous times. The Rail Minister is carefully considering the decisions made by the previous Government in relation to the Access for All programme. My hon. Friend will be aware that Leagrave was one of 50 stations across Britain selected by the previous Government for further consideration of whether they could be made step-free between the entrance and all platforms. We will shortly update the House on our approach to Access for All, but let me assure her that we are committed to improving the accessibility of the rail network, recognising the social and economic benefits that that brings.

Luton Train Station Redevelopment

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Monday 28th November 2022 Commons Chamber

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South) (Lab)]

I am pleased to have secured this debate about an issue that is very important to the people of Luton. I am incredibly proud of my town. Luton is an aspirational town, packed to the brim with vibrant cultures and caring communities. It is called a town but is in fact the size of a city; the latest census data shows a population of 225,000 in 2021—an increase of about 11% over the past 10 years.

However, all the great things that make Luton a brilliant place are undermined by the station and rail entrance to our town centre. Whether someone lives in Luton, works in Luton, visits our town or simply travels through, there is a chance they will have to experience Luton train station. Rather than simply putting to the Minister my personal feelings about Luton station—I have put those on the record in the House many times— I asked the good people of Luton on social media for their thoughts. Here are a few snippets:

“The station building itself is dull and decrepit.”

There is a

“Lack of lifts to platforms. Lots of leaks everywhere, platform often gets puddles and it’s easy for travellers to get wet.”

The station

“is completely inaccessible for the disabled, elderly and those carrying luggage”

and a

“Nightmare for families with small children and people with mobility issues…You can’t shelter from the rain because one of the platforms has a waterfall…It’s a terrible first impression for visitors to our town arriving by train.”

It is “Not fit for purpose.”

From testimonies of local people and discussions with Thameslink GTR, Network Rail, past Government Ministers and the Department for Transport, it is overwhelmingly clear that redevelopment is needed. We have only seen basic remediations of the station since the 1950s, with the odd licks of paint here and there. I know the station so well; I am a born and bred Lutonian. When I was a kid, we picked my dad up from the station. I have been a commuter for 25-odd years. I saw the removal of the old Red Star parcel depot and the extension of the platforms for 12-car trains. But fundamentally there has been no real change to the station overall.

I am sure that the Minister’s officials have written a good technical brief on Luton station, but I do not want today’s debate to be about whether Luton train station needs investment—it is clear that it does. Instead, I want the debate to provoke action from Government that leads to a redevelopment of Luton train station. This is not just about providing Luton with the station it deserves, but about the modern station it needs to thrive.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend, who is making an excellent speech. Does she agree that the point about a modern station and the need to thrive applies also to Leagrave station in the north of the town? It is in desperate need of lifts. The Access for All funding bid has the backing of Bedfordshire Rail Access Network, Network Rail, Thameslink GTR, the council, myself and thousands of our constituents. I sincerely hope that all those who signed my Leagrave petition and those who make the 1.8 million journeys a year from that station finally get the station that they deserve.

[Rachel Hopkins]

I thank my hon. Friend for that brilliant intervention. She is a fantastic champion for Luton North and Leagrave station; I am sure the Minister has taken note of the points she made so well.

Figures provided to me show that over 3.5 million passenger journeys were made via Luton station in 2019-20. Despite that, as mentioned by so many local people, poor accessibility is preventing many disabled and elderly people, young families, or those with luggage from travelling by train. At the moment, those with mobility restrictions are unable to access four out of the five platforms—and the one external lift to the ticket office upstairs is regularly out of order.

People unable to access the station are often forced to go out of their way to travel via Luton Airport Parkway station. However, Luton Airport Parkway, at the very southern tip of the town, serves Luton airport, both for travellers and workers, as well as associated businesses. It does not provide access to Luton’s town centre or the bus interchange.

Football fans visiting Luton for away games against the Hatters are also faced with the station’s accessibility issues, as well as what it looks like; the criticisms are similar from Luton Town fans. Just recently I was told that when Luton fans who travel by coach to away games are dropped back at Luton station after the game, some disabled fans cannot then access the platform they need to return home. Instead, their journey can take an additional hour or two, often late at night, as they have to go up to Bedford from platform 5, across, and then back down to Luton Airport Parkway or stations further south. It is either that or they have to pay for a taxi.

These transport issues are unacceptable now, but it is important to note that Luton Town are a football club on the rise. The club reached the championship play-offs semi-final last year and are currently one point from the play-off places. They are in the process of developing the exciting Power Court stadium, which will be closer to the train station and town centre than Kenilworth Road. It will have an increased capacity of initially around 7,500 more, potentially rising to 12,500 more, than Kenilworth Road down the line. Whether Luton Town are in the championship or make it to the Premier League, we will see an increasing number of visitors to the town, which will further demonstrate the accessibility issues.

I know that the Minister, like my mum, is an Arsenal fan. Just as an example, I ask how an Arsenal fan with a disability who follows their club around the country using the rail network would cope with travelling to Luton. I appreciate that Luton has been allocated Access for All funding, which will be used to create an obstacle-free accessible route from the station entrance to the platform, and that is very much welcome, but there are clear concerns about the delay in delivery and the continual dilution of the design quality.

The funding was allocated to Luton eight years ago. Due to deferrals, work on the lifts may not start until 2024, when we were led to believe that the work would be completed within the current control period by 2024. As well as these delays, there are concerns about the design of the lifts and the associated footbridge. Luton Borough Council has worked incredibly hard with stakeholders to identify preferred options. There are rumours that the roof may be removed from the footbridge connected to the lifts, seemingly without consultation with the council, exposing passengers to the elements. We know that installing lifts now will be more cost-effective over the long term, and the absence of a covered footbridge seems at odds with the design of other stations of similar size to Luton. Will the Minister outline when we can expect work on the Access for All-funded lifts to begin? When can we expect to see the finalised agreed upon design of the lifts and footbridge? I will be very disappointed if a minimal viable product of a footbridge, with no covers, was forced on Luton station to the detriment of local travellers.

That leads to another key point that people in Luton repeatedly raise with me. Shiny new lifts on a decrepit station do not address the overall problem that the station is not fit for purpose. I have some photos here, which I will happily ensure that the Minister leaves the Chamber with, so that he can see for himself. Passengers are not getting the value for money they deserve, whether it is access to platforms or avoiding the long-standing water feature, more commonly known as the rain that pours down from the leaky roof on platform 3. What impression does that give of our town? A train station is a gateway to a town and is key to creating the perception of a welcoming community. People travel to Luton town centre for a whole host of reasons—to work, for shopping, for business, to deliver public services, to study at the university and to enjoy our arts and culture. The station is also part of the walk-through from High Town down to the town centre—the clue is in the name —and it is used by people walking through at all times of day and night. All of these people experience a station that lets down our town.

Luton Borough Council has recognised the importance of increasing investment in the urban areas surrounding the station. Both the Bute Street car park mixed-use development and the Power Court development for Luton Town football club are within a stone’s throw of the thoroughly outdated Luton station. To maximise the potential of these developments and the regeneration of our town, we need a full redevelopment of the train station. As someone who says he is passionate about rail—I am, too—I am sure that the Minister agrees that rail can be a catalyst to regenerate areas. For every £1 that is spent on rail, £2.50 is generated for the wider economy.

A 21st-century station fit for the town we are, not the town we once were, could create huge economic and social opportunities for Luton. Improving the station as that gateway to our town centre would increase the attractiveness of Luton to residents and visitors, which is key to creating jobs, attracting investment and encouraging businesses to come to Luton.

Improving the station as a gateway to our town centre would increase the attractiveness of Luton for residents and visitors, which is key to creating jobs, attracting investment and encouraging businesses to come to Luton. Improving Luton’s rail offer also aligns with the UK’s wider aim of reaching net zero. A positive rail passenger experience is vital to encouraging the modal shift from cars to rail. It is clear that the current experience of Luton residents is not encouraging them to make that shift.

I know that the Minister and the Government recognise that the current situation is unacceptable. A full redevelopment of the station is an essential part of our town centre’s revival. Will the Minister outline what discussions he has had with Department for Transport and Treasury officials about a full redevelopment of Luton station? In his recent letter, he offered to have a meeting to discuss Luton station further. I accept his offer and hopefully our teams can liaise to secure a meeting. I also invite him to Luton to see it for himself in all its glory—it is 25 minutes on the train from St Pancras. It is important to Luton that it finally gets the train station that it deserves. I look forward to working with the Minister to find a solution that works for our town.

Taxis and Private Hire Vehicles (Safeguarding and Road Safety) Bill

Sarah Owen Excerpts

3rd reading
Friday 21st January 2022 Commons Chamber

[Robbie Moore (Keighley) (Con)]

I also congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington (Peter Gibson) on getting the Bill to this stage. I know that he has spent much time diligently looking at the legislation and has had many conversations with colleagues from across the House, including the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner), who has worked on similar legislation. I wish my hon. Friend all the best of luck as the Bill passes through this House and the other place.

As many hon. Members have said, current legislation in this area has unfortunately been outdated for too long. That is why the Bill is so important. We have many fantastic taxi drivers providing a fantastic, valuable service to all our constituents, doing the best that they can and doing an important job, whether taking constituents to the hospital for doctors’ appointments, or simply taking them home after a night out or from the train station to wherever they wish to go.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Darlington (Peter Gibson) for bringing this important Bill to the House. On that point, taxi drivers in Luton are taking people to and from vaccination centres in free “vaxi taxis”. Does the hon. Member agree that that is a fantastic service provided by our taxi and private hire vehicle drivers?

[Robbie Moore]

I absolutely do. That, along with examples that we have heard from other hon. Members, illustrates how important taxi drivers are. They provide a fantastic, valuable service to all our constituents, and it is great to hear that they are even taking people to vaccination centres. That is what I want to illustrate.

My hon. Friend the Member for Darlington has carefully articulated the Bill, which gets to the nub of the issue of safeguarding, ensuring that our constituents are protected when a minority of taxi drivers are not doing the right thing. I will share some instances which, unfortunately, I have experienced in my constituency. Only a couple of months ago, some constituents contacted me as they had video footage of several taxi drivers using their firm to distribute drugs in Keighley. We have a huge drug issue in Keighley. We therefore need one local authority to be able to share data with others so that we get the licensing provisions absolutely right. It is key that licences are given only to taxi drivers who perform their duty with absolute care. We all have fantastic drivers in our constituencies, and it is right that we protect drivers going about their business and keeping passengers safe while we have a targeted approach to clamp down on individuals who are abusing their positions.

Developments in both technology and the transport market in general have prohibited local authorities’ ability to share concerns about an individual, whether relating to darker issues such as using taxis to distribute drugs or safeguarding issues such as protecting women and young children, which are also a huge concern. That is why the current system needs changing. Someone who loses their licence from one local authority should not be able to get one from another local authority in close proximity and carry out their day-to-day duty in that same local authority area in which they lost their licence. That is why the collective ability to share data is so important.

Provisions of the Bill such as those that enable the Department for Transport to provide an information database on taxi drivers will help to streamline the process and ensure no bypassing of the rules. Likewise, the statutory requirements for licensing authorities to have regard to the database will ensure that the standards are kept up to date.

I also welcome the fact that the Bill enables councils to report their concerns about out-of-area drivers and have those concerns acknowledged in the appropriate way. The current circumstances, where local councils are unable to take enforcement action against taxi drivers licensed by other local authorities, even if they are operating in their own streets, are wrong and the Bill will help to counteract that. It will also ensure that local authorities have the power to share vital information on whether a taxi driver is safe to have passengers in their car.

It is also right that the Bill will ensure that drivers are fit and proper and that road safety is guaranteed across local authority borders. I represent a constituency that is right on the periphery of the county of West Yorkshire, on the periphery of Bradford Council’s local authority remit and with North Yorkshire literally a stone’s throw away. I know many taxi drivers take passengers between North and West Yorkshire; that is why this Bill is so important, enabling that data to be shared.

I am delighted that the Bill will go further, building on work done by the Government, to ensure that taxis and private hire vehicles are safer for passengers and drivers alike. The task and finish group on taxi and private hire vehicle licensing, established in September 2017, was important in kickstarting the process towards a safer taxi and private hire vehicle industry. The group was essential in starting the process of reviewing and considering the accuracy of the current taxi and private hire vehicle licensing authorities. It concluded not only that the powers of local authorities needed to be strengthened further, but that new legislation was needed to make our roads safer, so I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Darlington again on bringing forward this vital piece of legislation.

It is absolutely right that the Bill does not remove the current appeal process; it is right that there is a working appeal process. I would have liked to see the Bill encompass the ability to have CCTV in taxis, which would have provided a further mechanism for ensuring that our taxis are even safer; that children, young people, women and anybody using a taxi is safeguarded; and that drivers are also protected. I wish my hon. Friend the best of luck as this legislation goes through the House.

International Travel Rules

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Monday 19th July 2021 Commons Chamber

[Robert Courts]

The aviation sector is vital to hon. and right hon. Members across the House for the connectivity and employment that it brings and for our place in the world. The Government are committed to continuing to review the measures we have in place and to building a restart of international travel that protects public health and is safe, robust and sustainable. To that end, we review the country allocation regularly, and there are checkpoints at the end of July and in October when we will review the overall policy. I of course commit to keeping that under review.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

It feels a little like groundhog day: I stand before the Minister to ask for sector-specific support for aviation and he reels off figures that bear no relation to the reality of what aviation workers and the sector actually need. UK airports, compared with those in other countries, have had an absolute pittance from the Government. Will there be specific support for aviation to get it through a second summer of reduced travel, before it is too late?

[Robert Courts]

I recognise how important this is to the hon. Member, to her constituency and to her constituents who are employed in the sector, and I recognise that this is a difficult time for the sector. As she knows—she recognises the figures—we have provided about £7 billion of support through the cross-economy schemes as well as the AGOSS scheme, to which I referred earlier. We will keep all those things under review. We are really trying to enable the sector to restart in a safe, sustainable way that protects public health. By doing that, we help Luton airport, the airlines that operate from it, and all her constituents.

International Travel

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Thursday 8th July 2021 Commons Chamber

[Grant Shapps]

It is worth reflecting that this country is leading the way. I was having a look at which other major economies in Europe are going for an unlock as we expect and hope to do on 19 July, subject to confirmation next Monday, and I do not see any other countries that are opening up domestically quite as much. I know my right hon. Friend agrees that it is time to learn to live with the coronavirus. We have many advantages this year that we did not have last year, including easily available testing that is much reduced in price, and vaccination and immunisation that is accessible to all adults. That means that we can move to what will, I think, become the new world of aviation. To answer my right hon. Friend’s question, from my conversations with the aviation sector in particular I know that many of them have downsized but are now ready to start upsizing gradually as we come out of what has been the most horrendous couple of years on record for that sector.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

Not only has the Government’s hotel quarantining policy been an utter mess, but the handling of complaints and of the legitimate calls for exemption has been painfully slow by official channels. I have had toddlers left without milk and kids so poorly nourished in these hotels that ambulances have been called out. Some people have been left without access to drinking water, and families in Luton are being charged nearly two and a half grand for it. Can the Secretary of State tell me who is making a profit from these astronomical charges, and why there is no discount for people on low incomes?

[Grant Shapps]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right to highlight these cases and fight for her constituents. I just want to point out that the figure that is charged at the moment does not make a profit for the Government. In fact, it is still being somewhat subsidised in the process. I also want to point out that people should not be travelling to red-list countries. The only people who should be coming back to Government quarantine are British or Irish citizens or people with permanent rights of residence, and there should be a limit to the number of people who are still abroad and wishing to return. I sometimes come across cases where people are still using the red list as if it is a case of “It’s okay, I can come back and hotel quarantine.” That should not be the case. However, if the hon. Lady has individual cases, I am concerned to hear about them. The system is handled by the Department of Health and I would be very happy to pass them on.

Aviation, Travel and Tourism Industries

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Thursday 10th June 2021 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

Here we are again: MPs from both sides are getting up and asking for a plan for recovery for tourism and aviation, and asking for clarity on the border, and yet we have a Minister unwilling to stump up the support desperately needed to save businesses and jobs under threat because of restrictions on travel. These restrictions, while necessary, may be in place for another six months, and if we believe what Ministers are saying, they mean that we should not even be booking holidays this year. I will try not to repeat the points that I have made in numerous debates on aviation that have taken place in the past year because it is a bit like groundhog day: the sector spends time ahead of these debates lobbying for support and clarity on the border, and Ministers get up and offer neither clarity nor support.

Luton airport is one of the foundations of the economy in my constituency. The council depends on its revenue, and local charities benefit so much from the money that it brings in. To protect as many jobs as possible that Luton airport supports—whether that is people who work in its bars or cafes, air traffic control, airport taxi transfers, airport parking or any of the other thousands of jobs that depend on people moving—we need a clear road map for recovery for international travel now. At what point in the vaccine roll-out will it be safe to travel? When will the Government get a grip of the border policy? Where is the cash to support jobs in the sector and its supply chain?

People are desperate to get abroad again, not just for holidays but to see loved ones; yet we have had travellers trying to navigate the traffic light system changing at the last minute, Ministers saying, “It’s safe to travel, but you shouldn’t,” and people going without water and food for their kids at quarantine hotels. It has been absolute chaos. I absolutely believe that we need as strong a border policy as possible to halt the spread of new variants, but the chaos has not done that, as we see with the delta variant from India. At the very least, there must be clearer guidance for people travelling to and from green and amber destinations, and the Government must improve their communication with the sector.

Those of us in airport towns have been asking the Government to deliver the cash to save jobs. Let us look elsewhere, where this has been done better. The French Government gave €7 billion in state-backed loans to Air France. The Dutch gave €3.4 billion in support to their biggest airline. Our sector has had a pittance for runway maintenance, although any recovery package cannot be unconditional. I have been following the Competition and Markets Authority investigation into Ryanair and British Airways, which have offered cash refunds in very few cases. I want people in Luton North who did the right thing and cancelled trips when it was illegal to travel to get their money back.

In calling for support to protect jobs, I am also calling on the Government to step in and do more to protect jobs from fire and rehire practices from the likes of BA. It is wrong, and businesses should not be using the pandemic as an excuse to water down people’s rights at work or pay. They trade on our country’s name but not in our country’s interest. I hope that the Minister can give the sector the answer that it needs, or else we will be back here in a couple of months asking the same questions, seeing more jobs lost and still getting no answers.

Britain’s Railways

Sarah Owen Excerpts

Thursday 20th May 2021 Commons Chamber

[Grant Shapps]

I can most certainly provide an absolute assurance to my hon. Friend, who, I have to say, has been an incredibly doughty fighter on behalf of his Stoke constituency. He mentioned the Stoke to Leek line. I know that he has spoken to the Minister of State, Department for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Chris Heaton-Harris) and I know that he has an application into the third round of the Restoring Your Railway Fund application, which is enormously popular across the House. That is getting rid of the damage that Beeching did to our railways in this country under British Rail and it is good to see this Conservative Government opening it up again.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

Passengers in Luton North will be concerned by reports that the Chancellor is planning to cut our railways. After 15 years of Access For All funding, it is truly shocking how many stations, including Leagrave in Luton North, remain inaccessible to wheelchair users, those with mobility issues, and parents like myself with pushchairs. Under this review, will the Secretary of State accelerate Access For All funding so that passengers with access needs in Luton North can have proper and equal use of our railways?

[Grant Shapps]

I do agree, but we have a fundamental issue here: our railways were built by the Victorians, who did not have any kind of disability discrimination legislation at the time. Many of the stations are far less accessible than we would want to see, which is why we have the Access For All fund, with which the hon. Lady is familiar. I always encourage people to bid for it. There is no prouder moment than when I go round the country with my fellow Ministers to open up stations that are now accessible to people in every kind of way, and I encourage her to apply for that. I have to say that the Chancellor would be pretty surprised to hear the hon. Lady talk about his “cuts” to our railways. He has just put £12 billion into keeping them running over the past year due to covid.