Oral Answers to Questions
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
We are empowering local leaders with unprecedented powers and funding to deliver the transport improvements that will best connect their communities. We have allocated £1 billion of local transport funding to the Liverpool city region, and £420 million to Cheshire and Warrington. Thanks to this funding, local leaders can prioritise bus improvements, road repairs, and better cycling and walking routes for their constituents.
Sarah Pochin
It has been a year since I started raising the issue of the Mersey tolls creating barriers to growth and prosperity in Runcorn and Helsby. Despite my asking questions, sending letters, meeting with Ministers and campaigning alongside local residents and businesses, the Government still refuse to consider support for businesses south of the Mersey, which are unfairly penalised simply because of their geography. Will the Minister now reconsider helping those who are affected with subsidies for businesses in Runcorn?
Simon Lightwood
The hon. Lady and I met in October to discuss the tolls on the Mersey Gateway. As she is aware, these charges are the responsibility of Halton borough council. Thanks to funding already provided by the Department, residents of Halton can register a vehicle to use the crossings for personal journeys, free of charge, for an annual fee of £12. Businesses and constituents have benefited greatly from the construction of the Mersey Gateway bridge, which was only made possible thanks to the toll income and our annual grant.
Feryal Clark (Enfield North) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
This Government are determined to deliver better bus services. We are working closely with local leaders across England, and have confirmed over £3 billion of funding over the next three years to support and improve services. Alongside the new powers delivered by the Bus Services Act 2025, local authorities now have the multi-year funding that they need to deliver services that meet local needs.
Feryal Clark
I thank the Minister for her response. Our world-class bus drivers are the backbone of London’s bus service but have borne the brunt of the extreme heat that the city has been experiencing. The Mayor of London is working with bus operators and Unite the union to convene a heat taskforce to protect drivers and keep London’s bus network running safely. Will the Minister join me in commending this work, and does he agree that we must prioritise tackling the impact of climate change to ensure that our transport system runs smoothly?
Simon Lightwood
I will of course join my hon. Friend in commending the Mayor of London for the work that he is doing to keep the people who power our transport system safe. A well-functioning transport system is integral to growth. While we continue to decarbonise the transport system, we must also ensure that it is resilient to the impacts of climate change. The Government have published our climate adaptation strategy for transport, which sets out our vision for a climate-resilient transport system that underpins growth, keeps people and goods moving, and supports every part of the UK economy.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
Does the Minister hold any sway with the bus operator Stagecoach? If so, can he convey the concerns of my constituents about the reliability of the X74 service, which operates between Dumfries and Glasgow? Stagecoach has put older buses on this route, leading to poorer reliability and more cancellations. Given that most of the route is along a motorway, I am sure he understands how unsatisfactory breakdowns are.
Simon Lightwood
I of course agree that safe, reliable and affordable bus travel is really important. That is why we passed the Bus Services Act to empower local leaders to take greater control of bus services, and why we are providing £3 billion of extra support over the next couple of years to boost bus numbers. However, reliability is of course key, and I hope that Stagecoach is listening very carefully.
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
Liz Jarvis (Eastleigh) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
We have confirmed £45 million of funding for Hampshire county council to support and improve bus services for the next three years through the local authority bus grant. New powers provided by the Bus Services Act 2025 also give local leaders the tools and the long-term funding certainty they need to improve services and ensure that they reflect the needs of local communities such as those in Hampshire.
Liz Jarvis
We know that buses are important to the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham). They are also important to my constituents in Eastleigh. The 61 and 46 bus routes were axed after Hampshire county council withdrew subsidies, leaving my constituents struggling to get to work, school and hospital. Will the Minister ask the new Prime Minister to ensure that everyone in Hampshire can access bus routes? Does he agree with me that the hours of local concessionary bus travel should be extended?
Simon Lightwood
The Bus Services Act empowers local leaders to choose the model that works best in their area. Our reforms are focused on giving local authorities the tools they need to deliver better bus services. The Act also has a measure on socially necessary local services. Under that new measure, local transport authorities with an enhanced partnership, such as that mentioned by the hon. Lady, will be required to identify the local services they consider to be socially necessary. They will need to put in place requirements that must be followed before such services can be changed or cancelled. What I would say about the English concessionary scheme is that it already costs £795 million a year. Any changes would need to be carefully considered to ensure its financial sustainability.
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
The Government know how important affordable bus travel is for helping children and young people to access opportunities. That is why we are funding free bus travel for kids across England this August; it will help families to get out and about for less during the summer holidays. That builds on local initiatives from Labour Mayors in the west and north-east of England that allow children to travel by bus for free.
Amanda Martin
Last week, the all-party parliamentary group for tradespeople hosted a roundtable to discuss the barriers to young people taking up a career in the trades. Travel was raised as a particular issue. While I welcome the Government’s roll-out of new technical colleges, they are simply inaccessible to many young people, especially those in coastal communities, where transport links are poor. Once they qualify, tradespeople rely on their cars and vans to build their businesses and get to their place of work. What steps is the Minister taking, in conjunction with colleagues in the Department for Education and the Department for Work and Pensions, to break down the barriers to opportunity for young people considering these skilled, well-paid careers, and will the Government consider offering driving lessons through apprenticeships?
Simon Lightwood
My hon. Friend is right that transport has a vital role to play in unlocking opportunities for young people, as I know from growing up in a coastal community. Through the Bus Services Act 2025, we are giving local leaders greater power to shape bus services around their local needs, including in coastal and rural communities. We have confirmed over £3 billion for buses from 2026-27, which will help to improve connections to education, training and employment. I am sure that my colleagues in the Department for Education and the Department for Work and Pensions will have heard her call for driving lessons in apprenticeships.
Mr Speaker
I am not sure that fits in with buses, but not to worry. I call Clive Jones.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
If this summer’s free bus travel scheme for under-15s proves successful, will the Minister look to extend it for the future? It would help hard-working families in Wokingham make the most of their holiday period.
Simon Lightwood
The Labour party is keeping bus fares low. We introduced the £3 bus fare cap, after the previous Government failed to fund any support when the previous cap expired. Beyond March next year, we will continue to keep our options open, in order to make sure that bus travel is safe, accessible and affordable for everyone.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
The Government want a vibrant and competitive UK bus manufacturing sector, including in Scotland. That is why we are providing £73.2 million to support the purchase of a further 484 zero emission vehicles, and working with the industry and local leaders to provide greater certainty through our long-term order pipeline.
Euan Stainbank
As legal action is taken against the SNP Scottish Government for the ScotZEB3 grant scheme, which inexplicably saw more expensive orders go to Chinese manufacturers and cheaper ones to Falkirk—no wonder SNP Members have not showed up this morning—the Government and mayoral combined authorities must take heed of the exponentially rising Chinese market share, which has destroyed 115 Scottish jobs in my constituency off the back of the grant scheme. What more will Transport Ministers do, alongside their colleagues in the Cabinet Office and the Department for Business and Trade, to send an explicit message to those who are purchasing buses with taxpayer cash that they should be buying British?
Simon Lightwood
I share my hon. Friend’s commitment to UK bus manufacturing. I am delighted that through the UK bus manufacturing expert panel, mayoral combined authorities have agreed to a commitment that 10% of social value criteria will apply in all future bus procurement exercises. That means that when procuring buses, the positive impact that a manufacturer has on society, the environment and/or communities will be taken into account. We will continue to work with the bus sector to promote UK bus manufacturing.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
The Government are providing local authorities with a record £7.3 billion investment in local road maintenance, giving councils the long-term certainty that they need to fix potholes, repair road defects and adopt a more preventive approach to maintenance. Some of the funding is being used to incentivise best practice and innovation. In addition, the Government have funded £30 million for Live Labs 2 programming, which is testing innovative materials, new technologies and maintenance techniques to help authorities improve road conditions while reducing costs and disruption.
Dr Chowns
Potholes are the bane of all our lives, including for my constituents, but I have a cunning plan: we could fix potholes much faster by tapping into the superpowers of bin men and women. Bin lorries travel every road every week. Why not equip them with cameras and AI-enabled technology, so that they can spot, map and log potholes immediately, as soon as they appear? That would significantly speed up the process of fixing them. This has been done very successfully in Australia. Will the Department for Transport work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to ensure that local authorities have the funding and co-ordination needed to adopt this fantastic technology nationwide?
Simon Lightwood
That is exactly why the Government have funded the £30 million for Live Labs 2. We want councils to have access to the best available evidence on the condition of their roads. We have introduced a new road conditioning monitoring standard that enables local authorities to use a range of approved technologies, including innovative AI-based systems, to collect consistent and reliable data.
Sarah Russell (Congleton) (Lab)
In my area, the improvement on potholes is noticeable, and I thank the Government for the additional funding, which is being used for large patching work; no longer is there just shovelling into endless holes. I am concerned, however, about road safety in my constituency. Understandably, the money has been prioritised for addressing the enormous backlog of roadworks that developed under the last Government. What more can we do to ensure safety, as well as good road conditions?
Simon Lightwood
My hon. Friend will be aware that this Government brought forward, for the first time in over a decade, a road safety strategy. In addition, we have introduced a red, amber and green rating of local authorities, to identify where extra support is necessary in order to improve systems and practices, so that we can banish the potholes once and for all.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
Mr Speaker
Sir Bernard, we are on topical questions. You cannot just transfer your existing question to topicals. Shorten it, please, to help me get other people in. I am sure you want to hear others as well as yourself.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
We are investing over £7 billion to banish the potholes from UK roads. I would be delighted to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss his specific circumstances.
Adam Thompson (Erewash) (Lab)
Simon Lightwood
National Highways and local authorities are working together through initiatives, such as the £165 million growth and housing accelerator fund, to unlock housing sites where transport infrastructure is a barrier. I will ask National Highways to reach out to my hon. Friend.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
At a recent packed talk with my Highfields residents, they told me the same thing that all my residents tell me about: the scourge of potholes. We know that councils are facing a backlog of £17 billion in road repairs, but new technology exists that can detect early cracks and seal them before they become potholes. Will the Secretary of State commit to funding the roll-out of that preventive AI-based road technology, instead of constantly chasing the problem?
Simon Lightwood
We have invested over £7 billion precisely so that we can turn the corner on constantly having to react to potholes and go back to the same one time and again. We are investing £30 million on Live Labs 2, so that we can use new innovative technologies to finally turn the tide.
Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal) (Lab)
Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)
I am grateful to the Government for considering improvements to the A605 and Tinwell junctions on the A1, but the current plan is to put traffic lights in place and National Highways agrees that that is not the right approach. Will the Government put the funding, which is welcome, into widening the slip roads, which are far substandard and below the national requirements?
Simon Lightwood
I would be happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss this further.
Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)
Emma Lewell (South Shields) (Lab)
Simon Lightwood
As somebody who is running the Great North Run this year, I hope that the local highways authority will grip this issue and ensure it is dealt with. The structures fund is open for applications until 3 August.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
The Under-Secretary of State for Transport will be visiting Immingham this afternoon. Does he agree that his journey would be much more convenient if there were a direct train service from King’s Cross to my constituency, and will he join my campaign to ensure that happens?
Alison Taylor (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)
Would the Minister encourage the Government’s traffic commissioner for Scotland to build on the remarkable success of bus franchising in Manchester, and work with the Scottish Government to emulate the success of Manchester’s Bee Network in my constituency of Paisley and Renfrewshire North?
Simon Lightwood
As reporting from Greater Manchester’s Bee Network shows, bus franchising can deliver improved services for passengers, and the Government are taking steps to support the roll-out of bus franchising in England. Obviously, transport is a devolved matter, but I encourage Ministers in Scotland to learn from the success of Labour mayors in England.
Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)
The Government have cancelled the two main road projects in the east midlands—the A38 in Derby and the A46 in Newark. The Government did not inform anyone. The Labour mayor found out through the trade press that the Government had cancelled the contract, just as I did. What does the Secretary of State have against the east midlands? Will the incoming Prime Minister, who claims to want to see devolution and the empowerment of mayors, do something to fix this mess?
Simon Lightwood
Let me be clear that these proposals will be consulted on. The A38 Derby junctions and the A46 Newark bypass schemes are not in contract and are not scheduled to start main construction until the second half of the third road investment strategy. They are not as far progressed as RIS3 enhancement schemes elsewhere, meaning that the implications of potentially cancelling them would have a less significant impact compared with schemes that are further progressed.
Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)
Reform-led Kent county council wrote to Transport for London asking it to consider a number of options for bus route 96, with its preferred option being that it should terminate in Dartford town centre from now on. I will continue to fight for my constituents in Bexleyheath and Crayford to ensure that the route can serve Dartford, Bluewater shopping centre and Darent Valley hospital. Does my right hon. Friend agree that section 173(1) of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 is worded so that cross-boundary routes can operate in that way?
Aphra Brandreth (Chester South and Eddisbury) (Con)
Baddington bridge has been under a 7.5 tonne weight restriction since September 2025, with an hour-long diversion, leading to significant additional costs for local businesses and farms. Without a workable alternative, some drivers are ignoring the restriction, causing damage and disruption to country roads and nearby bridges. Will the Minister work with me and urgently review Cheshire East council’s application to the structures fund, so that we can reopen the bridge as soon as possible?
Simon Lightwood
I will of course meet the hon. Lady. Applications for the structures fund are still open, and we will make a decision in due course on any applications made.
Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)
In February this year, the Albert bridge in my constituency was closed. This, coupled with changes to Battersea Bridge Road and the surrounding roads implemented by Transport for London, is causing significant delays, disruption and congestion. Despite my painstaking attempts to engage with TfL over the past five months, it is proving quite difficult. TfL is not engaging with the lived experience of my constituents and myself, so will the Secretary of State engage with TfL on my behalf, to ensure that it engages and works with the constituency MP?
Simon Lightwood
Ministers are in close contact with TfL on a range of issues, including this one, and obviously the structures fund is open for applications, should the parties involved wish to pursue that route.
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
Earlier this year the Minister for roads, the hon. Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), wrote to me to say that Hammersmith bridge in my constituency would be a suitable candidate for the structures fund, but Hammersmith and Fulham council has just decided not to make an application on the basis that the structures fund is not suitable for repairs. Will the Minister please meet me as a matter of urgency to determine whether the structures fund remains a suitable way of funding repairs to Hammersmith bridge?
Simon Lightwood
I would be happy to meet the hon. Lady, but I will say once again that we would welcome an application from Hammersmith and Fulham council for the bridge in question.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Longton station in my constituency was allocated money from the transforming cities fund to have a lift installed. Unfortunately, that money was reallocated by the city council towards some paving slabs. Can I have a meeting with the Department to look at how we can get funding back for lifts at Longton station and then protect that money so that it cannot be reallocated to other projects?
Sarah Smith (Hyndburn) (Lab)
Haslingden Old Road in my constituency has been shut for two years due to a landslip. Will the Minister support me in urging Reform-led Lancashire county council to get this road reopened, as it is such a vital backbone going through my constituency?
Simon Lightwood
I encourage the local authority to get a grip of this issue. Of course, Reform-led councils do not have a great record. It is the party with the most councils that are red-rated on potholes and so on, and I encourage it to take action on this issue.
James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)
Passengers on the Fen line from King’s Lynn are suffering repeated cancellations and an unacceptably poor level of service. Now that the Government control both the track and the trains, will the Transport Secretary intervene and demand a robust action plan to sort out this poor performance?
Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)
For many, rural bus services are the only way to buy food, to get to work, school or medical appointments, or to access services. A shuttle bus is meant to replace the 173 First Bus service during six months of roadworks on rural roads, but would-be passengers could not find any details or get through to the operator, and they were left standing in extreme heat at the roadside. Will the Minister ensure that when routes are disrupted, operators and local transport authorities provide clear, accessible and timely information so that passengers are not left stranded?
Simon Lightwood
It is important that when bus services are disrupted, people are given timely information to ensure that they can undertake their journey. I will reiterate that all local authorities and bus operators should do just that.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
I am delighted that the midlands metro tram line will connect Dudley with the rest of the west midlands. However, the construction has caused disruption to local businesses such as the Dubliner’s, and repeated delays have exacerbated that. What support can the Minister provide to businesses that are being impacted by the repeated delays to the tram?
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
We very much welcome the Government’s initiative to give children free bus travel throughout the summer—it is a great idea. The only problem is that in Winchester and its surrounding area, Hampshire county council keeps cutting funding for bus services. Will the Minister explain what the Department is doing to encourage councils and operators to increase rather than decrease bus services?
Simon Lightwood
In addition to delivering £3 billion across the country—we have a new, formula-led way of doing that, rather than the competitive allocations of the previous Government—we have given local transport authorities increased powers to take back control of bus services, be that through enhanced partnerships, franchising or local authority-led bus companies.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
Some 40% of roads in Cambridgeshire take up roughly 80% of the highways budget. With the forthcoming announcement about local government reorganisation in Cambridgeshire, what assessment has the Department made of the feasibility of that being deliverable given that most of those roads will end up in the same, much smaller unitary authority?
Simon Lightwood
We continue to liaise closely with other Government Departments during the reorganisation. I am obviously happy to enter into further conversations with the hon. Member on his specifics.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
Cheltenham train passengers have a continual frustration with the turnaround time at Gloucester. There is also a new frustration: I wonder whether the Secretary of State or a Minister can tell me why so many trains due to terminate at Cheltenham unexpectedly terminate at Gloucester?
A1: North Northumberland
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 week, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
It is a pleasure to be here once again with you in the Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, to answer tonight’s Adjournment debate. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) on securing the debate, and on the determined and constructive manner in which he has represented the views of his constituents on this issue. May I also mention the persistent lobbying of my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Joe Morris) and, until recently, that of my hon. Friend the Member for Cramlington and Killingworth (Emma Foody), who joins me on the Front Bench. My hon. Friends have all lobbied for action on the A1.
I recognise the strength of feeling locally about the safety of the A1 and I acknowledge the tragic fatalities on the route. My thoughts and prayers are with the families, friends and communities affected. I know that the future of the A1 has been a matter of significant local interest for many years. It is a subject on which Members from across Northumberland have campaigned vigorously, and I fully recognise the importance attached to the route by local communities, businesses, freight operators and visitors.
The A1 is one of the country’s most important strategic roads. It earns its historic title as the Great North Road, continuing to move people and goods throughout the United Kingdom. Through Northumberland, it links the north-east of England with Scotland, supports economic activity, facilitates tourism and provides vital connectivity for communities along the route.
I do not underestimate the disappointment that many constituents felt following the Government’s decision not to proceed with the A1 Morpeth and Ellingham dualling scheme, given that we inherited a number of unfunded capital commitments from the previous Government. This evening, I want to explain what the Government are doing to improve safety on the route and how we intend to continue engaging with local communities and stakeholders going forward. It is entirely right that these matters should be discussed in this House, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
The proposal to dual the A1 between Morpeth and Ellingham has been under development for many years. During that period, considerable work was undertaken—consultation took place, design options were developed and statutory powers were ultimately secured. The Government recognise that many local people view the scheme as an opportunity to improve connectivity, support economic growth and address concerns about safety and the reliability of the route. However, Governments have a responsibility to make decisions based not only on ambition, but on evidence and affordability and the prudent use of public funds.
When Ministers reviewed the portfolio of strategic road schemes in 2024, really difficult choices had to be made across the transport network. The evidence presented showed that the Morpeth to Ellingham scheme represented a comparatively weak value-for-money proposition when assessed against competing investment priorities. At the same time, Ministers faced wider pressures on public spending and had a duty to ensure that the limited funding was directed towards investments capable of delivering the greatest benefits across the network. The decision was therefore taken to cancel the scheme, alongside a number of other strategic road projects.
While the Government concluded that the full dualling scheme should not proceed, it does not mean that we have ignored concerns regarding safety—indeed, quite the opposite. Safety remains the foremost priority of both the Department for Transport and National Highways. Following the cancellation announcement, National Highways commenced a dedicated safety study covering the Morpeth to Ellingham section of the route. The purpose of that work was to identify practical interventions capable of improving safety while representing a responsible use of public funds.
National Highways has examined a range of possibilities, including improved road signs and markings, vegetation clearance, improvements in visibility, speed management measures and junction improvements. Where schemes are sufficiently developed, affordable and deliverable, work will commence during the current road period. That work reflects a determination to identify practical steps that can improve safety, even where a larger scheme has not progressed.
A number of colleagues have argued that cancelling the scheme risks constraining economic growth in Northumberland and the wider north-east. I recognise those concerns, but the Government’s approach has been to prioritise investments that can demonstrate the strongest overall return on taxpayers’ money while supporting growth across the country. The decision should not be interpreted as a lack of commitment to Northumberland; the Government continue to invest significantly in transport infrastructure across the region. Decisions on individual schemes must always be considered in the broader context of national transport investment. Through the transport for city regions settlements, we are providing the north-east with £1.8 billion between 2027 and 2032. That unprecedented long-term funding could be spent on improvements to local roads or safety improvements. I also place on record my appreciation for the constructive engagement shown by local Members of Parliament.
Following the cancellation, National Highways has met with my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland to discuss concerns about the route and consider options for future improvements. National Highways has subsequently indicated that further work will take place to examine safety issues on sections of the A1 north of Ellingham, towards Berwick, and to identify additional route-based solutions where appropriate. That reflects the reality that most motorists experience the A1 as a continuous corridor.
Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)
I am not a Northumberland MP, but I really want to press the Minister on a couple of things. The fact is that this road is important not just to Northumberland and Scotland, but to the whole region. While Hadrian’s Wall is not on the A1, people travel to Housesteads and Vindolanda on the A1. That is a worldwide heritage attraction and centre, and it has that status. However, I am concerned. The Minister is saying some brilliant things about the north-east, but does he agree that we need urgency? The number of fatalities continues to make this issue a priority. The north-east loses out—Manchester is the south-west to us. I am really concerned that fatalities are not higher up the list.
Simon Lightwood
As a sand dancer—as someone from South Shields—I understand where the north is and the north-east is, but I hear my hon. Friend’s concerns about road safety, which is why National Highways is undertaking this work to see what additionally can be done to mitigate any safety concerns. I reiterate that £1.8 billion has been given to the north-east between 2027 and 2032, which could be used for improvements on local roads and safety improvements.
I welcome the continued engagement of my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland with National Highways on improvements to the safety and performance of this strategic route.
Joe Morris
Just to pick up on the comments around Treasury engagement, what is the Minister’s opinion of recent changes to the Green Book and the approach that Members of Parliament should take to engaging with his Department possibly now that the king of the north-west midlands is due to take up office? What should we be doing to drive that investment forward now that the rules have been changed and Ministers are considering perhaps a different context?
Simon Lightwood
I will come on to future funding, and of course National Highways and the Department for Transport will reflect and follow the changes to the Green Book.
I do not want to raise unrealistic expectations this evening: the Government have not reversed their decision regarding the Morpeth to Ellingham dualling scheme, nor am I announcing a replacement major capital programme tonight. However, that does not mean that nothing will happen. National Highways has continued assessing safety-focused options, and future proposals will be considered in the normal way for RIS4, taking into account evidence, affordability, deliverability and value for money, and any future improvements will be subject to viability and funding considerations within future investment programmes. Of course, I encourage National Highways to continue to liaise with the Scottish Government and local stakeholders.
David Smith
I wish to press a little on RIS4. One of the changes to the Green Book is about place-based approaches. Will that be under consideration so that ultimately the financial return on investment is not the be all and end all? Will consideration also be given to the place-based impact of some of the decisions?
Simon Lightwood
I reiterate that the Department will of course follow the changes to the Green Book accordingly. We will continue to liaise with Members regarding future investment.
John Lamont
The Minister said that National Highways is engaging with the Scottish Government, but it is really important that there is engagement at ministerial level. There is cross-party support for improvements—I think we all recognise their importance—but unless we get that ministerial drive pushing it forward, I do not think we are going to get what we want.
Simon Lightwood
Absolutely. We continue to engage and the Secretary of State has liaison meetings with counterparts in Scotland, as do I.
The Government recognise, of course, the importance of the A1 in Northumberland and further afield. We recognise the concerns that continue to be expressed regarding safety, resilience and economic growth. National Highways has undertaken significant work to identify targeted improvements capable of improving safety on the route, and further work continues on wider sections of the A1 in Northumberland. This Government remain committed to engaging constructively with local communities, National Highways and hon. Members as that work progresses towards delivery.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland once again not only for securing this debate, but for the important points that he has raised and his campaign on this issue on behalf of his constituents. I reassure him and other hon. Members that I take this matter extremely seriously, and I will continue this conversation to see what we can achieve to provide a positive outcome for road users in both the short and longer terms.
Question put and agreed to.
Government Support for Bus Services: West Dorset
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster 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
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms McVey. I congratulate the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) on securing this important debate. He has been a committed champion of bus services and transport needs in his constituency, and I thank him for the constructive tone with which he has approached these subjects.
Buses are at the heart of our vision for better and more integrated, reliable, affordable and accessible public transport. The Government have set out an ambitious plan to deliver better bus services, grow passenger numbers and ensure that communities that have too often been underserved can benefit from reliable public transport. Of course, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to local bus services. That is particularly the case in rural areas such as West Dorset, where there can be additional challenges to running a good local bus service.
The Bus Services Act 2025 puts decision making into the hands of local leaders across England, including in rural areas, so that they can determine how best to design their services for their communities and have greater control over routes and timetables. As the hon. Gentleman knows, since he was on the relevant Bill Committee, it expands the options available to local authorities, allowing each area to pursue the model of bus service delivery that best suits their needs while safeguarding the needs of passengers. The Act also tightens a requirement around the cancellation of vital bus routes, particularly those relied on by vulnerable and disadvantaged passengers. The Government are committed to monitoring the effectiveness of those measures, including the impact on rural services, with a review five years after their introduction.
We will provide meaningful financial support to improve bus networks totalling more than £3 billion over the next three years. That includes nearly £700 million per year for local transport authorities through the local authority bus grant. That funding can be used to support the introduction of new routes; for more frequent services; for safer, better, more accessible bus stops; for new electric buses; and for improved real-time information so that passengers can travel with greater confidence. It could also be used to increase the provision of community transport, for instance.
At the end of last year, we published individual multi-year settlements for local authorities under the local authority bus grant for the next three years. As the hon. Gentleman said, those allocations were determined by a new, revised formula. Gone are the days when it was a competitive funding bid—each local transport authority now receives funding. For the first time, the formula considered rurality to ensure that rural areas are not disadvantaged. Other parts of that formula include population size, levels of deprivation and the extent of current bus services.
I hear what the hon. Gentleman was saying about not just protecting what is there, but going further and building back. He has my assurance that we will continue to look at that funding formula to make sure that it is the fairest possible way to distribute funding across the country. We have already allocated multi-year settlements for the next three years, so it would be after that period. I am pleased to confirm that Dorset council will receive slightly over £12 million through the local authority bus grant for the next three years. That is nearly £200,000 more per year than the allocation in 2025-26, or roughly a 5% increase. Under the local authority bus grant, local leaders will be able to invest in transport priorities that are right for their area, such as enhancing bus services in rural communities.
Alongside the multi-year funding, this Government’s bus reforms are fundamentally about giving local leaders more powers and more choice over how to deliver services. That includes unlocking franchising as an option for all areas. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. Different areas face different challenges because of their geography, population density and demographics. That is why work is under way to provide active support to local transport authorities that wish to explore franchising, particularly in rural areas.
The work includes our bus reform and franchising pilot programme, which supports authorities with feasibility assessments for bus franchising. The programme is designed to test different types of franchising model to understand how they could be best implemented to deliver improved bus services for passengers in rural locations. Case studies, guidance and templates from the programme will be shared with other local transport authorities, ensuring that learning is captured and can support other areas considering franchising. These products could be particularly important for small towns and rural communities, including in West Dorset, where members of the community may rely on buses as their only realistic public transport option.
We also know that in some areas, traditional stopping bus services may not be viable. We want to encourage local leaders to consider a range of options to deliver better services for passengers. That includes incorporating demand-responsive transport and community transport services into the local transport network. DRT has the potential to improve local transport in areas where demand is more dispersed over longer distances, which makes it harder to provide conventional fixed-route services that meet residents’ needs.
Our franchising guidance outlines key considerations for LTAs exploring franchising regarding DRT, including how local bus services integrate with alternative models such as DRT. We have recently published guidance on best practice for local authorities to set up and deploy demand-responsive schemes, from planning and procurement through to launching and sustaining those services.
Making bus fares more affordable is one of the Government’s transport priorities because that really matters to passengers. The Government continue to cap single bus fares at £3 on thousands of routes in England, outside London, until March 2027, helping millions of people access affordable travel and better opportunities. That cap can be particularly beneficial for rural passengers, helping to limit the cost of journeys where single fares can otherwise be significantly higher.
The Chancellor went further in May, announcing more than £100 million additional funding for the bus sector, to help children travel free this summer, and to continue supporting services. Under the offer, children aged five to 15 will be able to travel free on participating local buses in England throughout August, helping families to get out and about for less, at a time of increased cost of living. Further details will be announced shortly.
To pick up on the point about better integration, I draw Members’ attention to a fantastic read—“Better Connected”, the Government’s integrated national transport strategy. That looks at how to dovetail buses with trams, trains, micromobility and active travel. I highly encourage Members to take a look at that, because we recognise the challenges they have mentioned today.
Adam Dance
My biggest concern is that we have no electric buses in Yeovil. There is nowhere to charge them because other depots have been shut down. How will we cope with an electric future if First Bus is closing depots?
Simon Lightwood
That will be a commercial decision for First Bus about whether to invest in those services. The option remains for local leaders to consider whether they want to pursue franchising and take greater control over that issue. They could also lift the ban on establishing new municipal bus companies. There are options there. I will continue to work across Government to ensure we get grid connections for future deployment of electric buses. Funding from local authority bus grants and other sources can be used to purchase electric buses.
In closing, I reiterate my thanks to the hon. Member for West Dorset for securing this debate, and to the other hon. Members for their interventions. Improving bus services, importantly in rural areas, is central to the Government’s mission to drive growth and opportunity across the country. We know there is more to do, but we are taking meaningful steps to ensure that wherever people live—in a city, rural area or small town—they have access to the reliable, accessible and affordable transport that they deserve.
Question put and agreed to.
Automated Vehicles: Protecting Marketing Terms
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I wish to provide the House with an update on the implementation of the Automated Vehicles Act 2024.
Today I have published the Government’s response to the “Protecting marketing terms” consultation and laid the Automated Vehicles (Marketing Restrictions) Regulations 2026 statutory instrument.
The purpose of the “Protecting marketing terms” consultation was to identify the words, expressions, symbols or marks that should only be used to describe authorised or listed automated vehicles. These regulations will help prevent end users in Great Britain from being misled into thinking that vehicles that are not authorised automated vehicles can safely and lawfully drive themselves.
Misleading marketing of automated vehicles is dangerous: it can mislead drivers into thinking that they do not need to pay attention to the road. As more manufacturers offer high-end driver assistance systems, misleading marketing risks worsening road safety and could undermine trust and successful adoption of self-driving vehicle technology.
The AV Act sets out an authorisation process to determine whether a vehicle can drive itself safely and legally without being controlled or monitored by a human. This process would be undermined if businesses are able to claim that their vehicles are self-driving without getting the vehicles authorised, which may lead to confusion about vehicle capabilities and driver responsibilities.
Consultation outcome
The consultation demonstrated broad support for protecting certain marketing terms so that they may only be used legally to describe vehicles authorised or listed as able to safely drive themselves. This measure is intended to:
safeguard the integrity of the authorisation and listing process;
ensure public safety; and
build public trust in self-driving technology.
Protected terms and scope
The following terms will be reserved for authorised or listed vehicles:
Automated
Automated driving
Autonomous
Autonomous driving
Drive autonomously
Drive itself
Driverless
Self-driving
This protection will extend to different parts of speech and other grammatical forms of these terms. Additionally, the words “automated” and “autonomous” will be protected only when used to describe a vehicle as a whole or a vehicle’s overall driving capability, while remaining permissible for specific parts or features—for example, automated windscreen wipers or autonomous emergency braking.
Other terms and enforcement
Although consultees suggested additional terms such as “robotaxi” and “AI driver”, these will be regulated under the general confusion offence in section 79.
The Government recognise that, as the technology is deployed, there may be other terms in future that could give a misleading impression that a vehicle is able to drive itself. This is why the protected terms offence under section 78 operates alongside the confusion offence under section 79. Marketing communications likely to confuse end users into thinking that an unauthorised vehicle is capable of driving itself, including through the use of terms that are not protected, will be enforced through section 79. The Government will keep this under review, with the possibility of protecting further terms in future.
The AV Act places a duty on the Secretary of State to enforce the marketing offences. In practice, enforcement is expected to be carried out by the Department’s agencies through civil powers under schedule 5 to the AV Act. Where a breach of the marketing offences results in criminal prosecution and conviction, the Act sets the maximum penalty as a two-year prison term, a fine or both.
Next steps
Some respondents raised an interest in further guidance on part 4 of the AV Act—misleading marketing—and the Government will consider developing supporting materials. A wider programme of education, research and review is also under consideration.
A copy of this publication will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and published on www.gov.uk .
[HCWS196]
Automated Vehicles: Consultation on Draft Statement of Safety Principles
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I would like to provide the House with a further update on the progress the Government have made in implementing the Automated Vehicles Act 2024.
Today the Government are publishing their analysis of responses to last year’s call for evidence on the statement of safety principles. The call for evidence sought views on how the statement of safety principles could be used, described and measured.
Alongside this publication, the Government are launching a statutory consultation on the draft statement of safety principles. This public consultation will seek views from organisations representing road users, road safety groups, and self-driving vehicle businesses, in line with the requirements set out in section 2(3) of the AV Act 2024. The consultation will be open until September 2026. Subject to the outcome of the consultation, the statutory statement of safety principles for AVs will be laid before Parliament next year for approval.
Safety sits at the heart of the AV regulatory framework, ensuring that AVs are safe to use on Great Britain’s roads and remain safe throughout their deployment. A cornerstone of this framework is the statutory statement of safety principles, which will guide the Secretary of State in decisions on whether an AV can be deployed on Great Britain’s roads, and in the ongoing monitoring of authorised AVs.
There are also principles relating to behaviours specific to an AV, such as operating only within their authorised domain. In addition, the Secretary of State may have regard to the statement of safety principles when deciding whether the in-use regulator should investigate an incident, and when considering whether to impose sanctions and the appropriate extent of any such sanctions.
The statement of safety principles will provide guidance on the behaviours that the Secretary of State expects to see from vehicles in meeting the self-driving test of travelling safely and autonomously. Consistent with the AV Act 2024 and international United Nations Economic Commission for Europe regulations, the safety standard underpinning the statement of safety principles is that AVs should achieve a level of safety equivalent to at least that of careful and competent human drivers.
To achieve this, the draft principles are based on several behaviours considered to be consistent with careful and competent human drivers. These cover five broad themes:
Vehicle control
Hazard anticipation, perception and reaction
Obeying traffic rules
Interaction with other road users
Adaptability to road conditions
This is a reserved matter, as the statement of safety principles is made under the Automated Vehicles Act 2024, which confers these functions on the Secretary of State. The statement of safety principles extends to England and Wales, and Scotland, and applies to England, Scotland and Wales.
The statement of safety principles consultation has been laid as a Command Paper in both Houses. The summary of responses to the statement of safety principles call for evidence and a research report into public perceptions of AV safety that supports the development of the statement of safety principles will be placed in the Library of each House. All papers are published on gov.uk.
[HCWS119]
Road Maintenance Funding: Nottinghamshire
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster 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
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) for securing this important debate. He spoke with real passion about the state of roads in Nottinghamshire, and rightly so, because this is not an abstract issue. It is about the roads that people rely on every day to get to work, to take their children to school, to support local businesses and, above all, to travel safely. For too long for people across Nottinghamshire, those everyday journeys have been made harder by roads that simply have not been good enough or safe enough.
My hon. Friend highlighted that this has not happened by accident. It is the product of years—indeed, over a decade—of under-investment in our local road network: potholes left unrepaired, surfaces deteriorating, preventive maintenance deferred again and again. We are now dealing with the consequences of those decisions. This Government are determined to turn that around. That is why we are providing a record £7.3 billion for highway maintenance over the next four years, giving councils the long-term certainty that they need to plan properly to resurface our roads and tackle the pothole plague once and for all.
Crucially, we are also backing the east midlands by providing £2 billion in transport for city regions funding through to 2031-32. Delivered through the East Midlands combined county authority under the leadership of Mayor Claire Ward, this substantial investment, devolved to the region, will enable transformational investment in local transport infrastructure, including roads, and empower local leaders to make decisions that reflect real local priorities, because we know that better decisions are made closer to the communities they serve. However, funding alone is not enough. It must be matched by delivery. That is why we have introduced a strengthened system of accountability, built on transparency, clear performance ratings and incentives for local highway authorities.
First, transparency. Councils now have to publish clear annual reports showing the condition of their roads, what they are doing to maintain them and how public money is being spent. That includes not just how many potholes they have fixed, but how they fixed them, whether repairs are built to last and whether they are investing in prevention, such as maintaining drainage and using surface treatments to stop potholes forming in the first place. My hon. Friend mentioned his constituent who had simply given up reporting a pothole on her street. It may be useful to point out that councils will now have to publish how residents can report road defects, how that information is used to prioritise repairs and whether people are kept informed once a problem has been raised. Transparency really matters. It gives residents a clear view of how their roads are managed, makes councils accountable for their choices and helps to ensure that funding is used to deliver long-term improvements, not just short-term fixes.
Secondly, ratings bring that information together into a clear, accessible judgment of performance so that residents can easily see how well their council is maintaining the roads they rely on. In the most recent assessment, Nottinghamshire was rated green for highways maintenance spend, but amber for the condition of its roads and adherence to best practice, resulting in an overall amber rating. That tells us two things: funding is reaching the right places because the council is spending the money allocated to it, but there is still work to do on improving road conditions and embedding best practice.
Thirdly, incentives. A share of the funding is now linked to clear performance requirements that every authority is expected to meet. That includes spending all the Government’s highways funding on maintenance rather than devoting it elsewhere. It also requires authorities to maintain up-to-date asset management plans, which ensure that maintenance decisions are based on evidence and long-term outcomes rather than simply react to potholes once they appear.
Alongside that, we are supporting authorities to improve through highways innovation programmes such as Live Labs 2, targeted support for red-rated authorities and updating the code of practice for well-maintained highways. We are helping councils to adopt new approaches, build capacity and deliver better outcomes for residents. Earlier this year, we published the first national road safety strategy in over a decade, setting out how we will cut road deaths and serious injuries on Britain’s roads by 65% by 2035.
Let me be clear that this Government are stepping up. We are providing the funding, we are putting in place the performance framework, and we are backing regions such as the east midlands to succeed. On a national scale, we are already beginning to see the impact of that approach. In 2025, after nearly a decade-long decline, the percentage of roads receiving maintenance treatment went up again, but it is for local highway authorities, in this case Nottinghamshire county council, to get on and deliver. That means more than just filling potholes when they appear; it means investing in long-term preventive maintenance, making smarter use of materials and technology, and building a road network that is safer, smoother and more reliable for the future. Recent figures show that, while overall road fatalities have declined, far too many people are still killed or seriously injured on our roads each year. Every pothole that is left unrepaired and every surface that is allowed to deteriorate is a risk that we must take seriously.
I finish by returning to the central point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield: the people of Nottinghamshire deserve roads that are properly maintained. This Government are delivering the investment needed to make that happen, and we are putting in place clear expectations and accountability to ensure results. It is now for Nottinghamshire county council to turn that investment into results on the ground.
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate, and I look forward to continuing to work across the House, and with Mayor Claire Ward and local partners, to ensure that the people of Nottinghamshire see the improvements that they have every right to expect.
Question put and agreed to.
Oral Answers to Questions
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
Following the UK bus manufacturing expert panel meeting in March, my officials and I continue to engage with our counterparts across Government—including my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business and Trade and his team, who are responsible for UK Government tariff policy—on support for UK bus manufacturing and the transition to zero emission fleets.
Euan Stainbank
Imported diesel buses have a 16% base rate tariff, yet electric buses have a tariff rate of 10%. As we seek to transition fully to electric after 2030, and considering the existential risk that the under-investigation Chinese competition currently presents to the 50,000 jobs that depend on UK bus manufacturing, will Ministers consider raising this matter urgently with Business and Trade Ministers to encourage them to harmonise those rates at 16% at least?
Simon Lightwood
I regularly raise issues affecting the bus sector with the Department for Business and Trade and will continue to do so. I will raise the specific point my hon. Friend makes with the relevant Minister and write to him following that conversation.
Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)
Bus companies and local authorities are rightly being encouraged to buy electric buses. However, half of new buses in the United Kingdom are bought from China, which does not support our great British bus industry. Will the Minister elaborate on whether the current procurement rules for electric buses are suitable for encouraging bus companies to buy British?
Simon Lightwood
On the UK bus manufacturing expert panel, we have managed to strike an agreement with all mayoral combined authorities to insist on at least 10% social value in their contracts, which I think is a really important step forward. We will continue to work with operators and combined authorities to do our best to ensure that British manufacturers are able to compete.
Siân Berry (Brighton Pavilion) (Green)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
Safety is at the heart of the third road investment strategy, which includes a new national programme to deliver targeted safety improvements on higher-risk roads. It also sets National Highways a challenging target to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on our motorways and major A roads, aligning with our overall target of reducing the number of KSIs on British roads by 65% by 2035.
Siân Berry
The Secretary of State’s new third road investment strategy requires a reduction of only 7.5% in the number of people killed or seriously injured on the strategic road network by 2031, yet meeting the 2035 target in the road safety strategy requires a reduction of about 55% across England’s roads by that date. That means National Highways can get away with doing almost nothing, while local authorities are left to make up the difference. How can the Minister justify handing £27 billion to this failing body, while councils across the country are crying out for funds to make everyday walking and cycling safer?
Simon Lightwood
Motorways are already among the safest roads in the country. The number of KSIs on motorways in 2024 represented 3% of the total for England, despite motorways carrying over a fifth of all road traffic. The target reflects that. The approach is challenging but realistic, focused on what National Highways can directly deliver over this period. Of course, that sits alongside wider action in the road safety strategy to dramatically reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries across all roads in Great Britain.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
This Government passed the Bus Services Act 2025 to give local leaders greater control over their bus services, and we are supporting local transport authorities with over £3 billion of funding over the next three years to make the improvements a reality. We are also providing support and guidance on enhanced partnerships and franchising, giving local leaders the tools they need to ensure services meet local needs.
Liz Twist
People across the north-east, including in my constituency of Blaydon and Consett, have been benefiting from a £2.50 bus fare for a single journey, funded thanks to the Labour Government and Kim McGuinness, our Labour Mayor of the North East. With that fare, there have been over 100 million bus journeys and an increase in bus patronage. To build on that success, we need the national bus fare cap funding from this Government to continue. Will the Minister confirm that the Government intend to keep the £3 national cap on bus fares beyond March 2027?
Simon Lightwood
We recognise how important affordable bus fares are, which is why we have extended the £3 bus fare cap in England until March 2027. We are evaluating the impact of the scheme, including on passengers and value for money, to inform decisions on the future bus fare policy. Alongside the cap, this August we are giving every child free bus travel, building on the Kids Go Free scheme pioneered by Mayor Kim McGuinness in the north-east.
Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
London’s Labour mayor is using part of the £2.2 billion settlement provided by the Government in the spending review to make Central line upgrades and refurbishments that will benefit the hon. Member’s constituents. Essex county council and London boroughs will also receive over £500 million to maintain and improve local roads by 2030. In addition, Essex will receive over £377 million of funding over the next three years to support its transport priorities.
Dr Hudson
My constituents face many transport issues. We Central line users endure delays, overcrowding and graffiti. Meanwhile, residents in Waltham Abbey have no access to the tube at all and have been left with a limited bus network since Transport for London withdrew services. Young people are unable to get to the next stage in their education, and residents are struggling to get into London. I pay tribute to the campaign to bring back red buses to Waltham Abbey. Please can the Government press the Mayor of London, TfL and Essex county council to work together to give the people of Waltham Abbey and beyond the transport services they desperately need?
Simon Lightwood
The Government are investing over £2 billion in London’s transport network, which is the largest Government investment in London’s existing transport network for over a decade. That means that London can invest £500 million in the Central line improvement programme to upgrade signalling and refurbish those 30-year-old trains. Some refurbished trains are already in operation, and the programme will complete by 2029. The hon. Member also referenced the issue with graffiti. I know that the mayor is concerned about that and has deployed a dedicated team of over 120 people to remove graffiti as quickly as possible; over 3,000 tags were removed from Central line trains in April.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
More than two thirds of driving test centres have a maximum 24-week waiting time, and the average waiting time for a test is 22.3 weeks—a month longer than in July ’24. For all the Government’s talk of recruiting new examiners, the instructor recruitment conversion rate is just 4%. When will the Government stop talking about taking action and actually get a grip of the driving test wait time crisis?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency is continuing driving examiner recruitment, with 1,577 full-time driving examiners in May 2026—an increase of 147 compared with May 2025, when there were 1,430 full-time equivalents.
Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)
Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)
Simon Lightwood
I, too, want to see more cycling in London, and in towns and cities across the UK. Dockless cycles are one way to support that aim. We want to empower local leaders to shape shared cycle schemes so that they can deliver the greatest possible benefits and mitigate any possible issues. We will introduce local licensing regulations and guidance in the coming months.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
Wes Streeting (Ilford North) (Lab)
Simon Lightwood
As my right hon. Friend mentioned, I have seen at first hand the impact that the bridge’s closure is having on the local community. We announced a structures fund to support rundown bridges, decaying flyovers and worn-out tunnels. Local authorities have until early August to apply for this investment, and the Department is already engaging with Redbridge council on its application.
Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
The Minister will know that I have been campaigning on the availability of driving tests, so I was pleased to see this week that our changes have released driving tests back into the system. Will he update me on how the demand for tests in my North West Leicestershire constituency will be matched with the supply of new driving tests?
Simon Lightwood
We are indeed going further to tackle this issue: since 31 March drivers have been limited to two changes of their driving test, since 12 May only learners have been able to amend and book their tests, and since 9 June the area that a learner driver can move their test to has been limited. The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency will also continue to use Ministry of Defence driving examiners to provide additional practical tests.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Diolch yn fawr iawn, Lefarydd. Coastguards in my constituency were told only last week that they are to lose their remuneration, and they are furious that their specialist skills and dedication are now being undervalued. I heard the Minister say earlier that he was prepared to meet colleagues from across the House. I hope that the offer is extended to all colleagues with coastguard stations, because the risk to recruitment and retention, as well as to the work of other emergency services, such as the police, needs to be clearly understood.
Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)
Residents in Hertford and Stortford tell me that their bus services are too often irregular or delayed, causing unnecessary disruption and stress. I welcome the £19.5 million allocated to Hertfordshire county council through the local authority bus grant last year, but will the Minister say a bit more about how we will work with the Lib Dem administration to ensure that the money is used effectively, and about what this Labour Government are doing to improve bus services in semi-rural communities such as mine?
Simon Lightwood
We are doing a number of pilots to demonstrate the potential effectiveness of bus franchising in rural areas. That is on top of ensuring that, for the first time, rurality is considered in bus funding.
James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)
Passengers on Great Northern services to and from King’s Lynn are fed up with repeated weekend closures. Given that the Secretary of State now oversees the track and those trains, does she agree that discounts should be offered when rail replacement buses are in operation?
Mr Speaker
Order. One of us is going to sit down, and it will not be me. As a Whip, the hon. Lady well knows that topical questions are meant to be short and punchy. As important as this is, I am sure the Minister has got the answer ready.
Draft Clean Air Zones Central Services (Fees) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2026
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Clean Air Zones Central Services (Fees) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2026.
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Wishart. The draft regulations make two amendments to the Clean Air Zones Central Services (Fees) (England) Regulations 2020. First, they extend the period during which local authorities may be charged for using the clean air zones central services website from 31 March 2027 to 31 March 2031. Secondly, they increase the fee that local authorities pay to use the services from £2 to £4 per transaction, as a step towards full cost recovery. The regulations are due to take effect from 1 September 2026.
It may benefit hon. Members if I provide some context. As many are already aware, clean air zones encourage green travel by charging older, more polluting vehicles a fee to enter the zone. They have been introduced selectively, only where evidence shows that they are the quickest way to reduce nitrogen dioxide concentrations in a local area, and where other options would not deliver the same results as quickly. Seven clean air zones are currently operated by local authorities in England: Bath and North East Somerset; Birmingham; Bradford; Bristol; Portsmouth; Sheffield and Rotherham; and Tyneside.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
My understanding is that there are no plans to introduce such zones in either Middlesbrough or Redcar and Cleveland, but is the Minister able to confirm that for the record?
Simon Lightwood
At this time, the Government have no plans to introduce further clean air zones to additional cities. Our focus is to work with local authorities to support them in meeting their legally binding obligations to improve air quality in their localities.
Let me be clear that these clean air zones are working. Between 2019 and 2024, in the city areas that have clean air zones, annual average concentrations of nitrogen dioxide reduced by between 18% and 46%. They dropped by about a third in Bristol, by 40% in Bath and North East Somerset, and by more than 40% in Tyneside. However, it is more than just lines on a graph; these results matter. In the UK, it is estimated that exposure to air pollution has an annual impact by shortening lifespans equivalent to 29,000 to 43,000 deaths.
The impact of air pollution is felt most acutely by the most vulnerable in our society, including older people and younger children. This is about children breathing cleaner air, building healthier communities, preventing illness and protecting our NHS. As a Government, it is one of the most important things that we can do for the public, and it is the least that they deserve. In 2021, the then Government built the “drive in a clean air zone” central services website to support local authorities to introduce and operate clean air zones. The website lets drivers check whether their vehicle meets the air-quality standards for a particular clean air zone and, if not, pay a daily charge to drive in it. A call centre supports people who do not use digital channels to make payments, and it helps local authorities with enforcement.
The 2020 regulations support the implementation of clean air zones. They establish a legal framework for the Transport Secretary to charge local authorities a fee of £2 for each proposed payment through the central services website. The regulations ensured that the £2 fee was payable until 31 March 2027, which is the date by which it was estimated that all local authorities with a clean air zone would have achieved compliance with air quality requirements and exited the central services. The previous Government were not able to achieve that, and some areas are now not expected to meet their air quality target until the early 2030s. Therefore, clean air zones will need to remain in place for longer than envisaged by the 2020 regulations. This instrument, which extends the charging period, is necessary to continue operating the central services.
The legal framework supporting the 2020 regulations has also changed following the UK’s exit from the European Union. As a result, it is no longer possible to rely on the same powers to amend the original regulations. The draft regulations presented to the Committee are therefore made under updated powers introduced by the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.
These draft regulations are an important step to ensuring that the costs of providing the central services are recovered fairly and transparently, rather than falling to the taxpayer. I make it clear that raising the fee to £4 will increase cost recovery to an estimated 90% of the lifetime of CAZ central services from financial year 2020-21 to financial year 2030-31. That is higher than the 69% cost recovery we estimate for the period if the £2 fee were to remain unchanged. It leaves the Government subsidising transactions at 10% of the overall cost, as opposed to 31%. It is a sensible move towards full cost recovery.
I reassure the Committee on the potential concerns that the fee increase will be passed on to motorists. Our expectation is that that will not be the case. Ministers wrote to councils in December last year, strongly urging them not to pass the transaction fee on to motorists through increased clean air zone charges. Tackling the cost of living is this Government’s top priority, and we are ensuring that this change does not add to the challenges that many people are now facing.
To be clear, this is not a war on motorists. This Government are backing drivers and businesses through a range of measures, including extending the 5p fuel duty cut and introducing a 12-month road tax holiday for hauliers. The extension to the 5p duty cut is keeping taxes at a 16-year low and saving the average driver £120.
We are making record levels of investment in our road network, including a £7 billion commitment to tackle potholes and improve local maintenance. Alongside that, we are supporting the transition to cleaner transport, including through the £2 billion electric car grant, which is helping drivers move to zero emission vehicles. It has already helped 120,000 UK drivers to do that since July 2025.
Returning to the statutory instrument, the Government’s understanding is that the fee increase to £4 is manageable, as most of the schemes are currently running in surplus. It is not right that taxpayers across the country should be subsidising surpluses in these few authorities, generated from a scheme that is designed to clean up our air, not generate income.
For example, from the information published by Bristol city council, we understand that its clean air zone surplus has been running to several million pounds a year. This fee increase could reduce that by between £400,000 and £1 million a year in each of the coming three financial years. Should any local authority fall into a shortfall with its clean air zone operating costs, that will be covered by the Government under new burdens rules.
When clean air zones were established, the Government informed local authorities that the transaction fee would be reviewed once costs and income were clearer. Clean air zones have been in operation for several years, and we now have the necessary data from the past 12 to 18 months on costs, revenues and the expected duration of clean air zones to review and amend the fee.
Local authorities are expecting this fee change from 1 September, and officials continue to help them prepare. The Department for Transport will work closely with its delivery partner, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, to ensure that the new fee is reflected when the regulations come into effect on 1 September.
The regulations will ensure that central services continue to operate effectively in a sustainable and transparent way, while supporting ongoing improvements to air quality. I commend these regulations to the Committee.
Simon Lightwood
I have heard that a couple of drops of olive oil is quite good for temporary hearing loss, so let me reiterate once again that this is not a tax on motorists. We do not expect local authorities to raise their charges to motorists on account of it, and we have expressly asked them not to do so.
Greg Smith
If local authorities pass on the fee, what will be the Government’s response?
Simon Lightwood
We have said, very clearly, that if this results in a shortfall, we will top it up through the new burdens assessment.
This is about good governance. The previous Government said they would review the costs when the data became clear. Good governance means that the Government provide a service that aligns with managing public money to ensure full cost recovery. We are doing this now because the last Government failed to increase the central services fee, which is designed to cover the cost of administering the services since they introduced clean air zones in 2020.
Most motorists entering a clean air zone will pay no charge at all because their vehicle is compliant, and the proportion is likely to continue to increase. The Government’s £2 billion electric car grant has helped 120,000 UK drivers move to zero emission vehicles since July 2025.
Clean air zones are designed to clean up air and should not be used as a revenue raiser for any organisation. I can assure hon. Members that clean air zones are not a revenue raiser for the DFT. By moving the fee to £4, we are still subsidising central services to the tune of 10%. Under the new burdens doctrine, the Department will pay for local authority deficits that arise in their CAZ operations.
The Government have worked closely with local authorities to prepare them for the fee increase and to understand the impacts. Local authorities that currently generate a surplus from their clean air zone will see some reduction in revenue following the fee increase, but no local authority will be left in deficit.
To answer the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley, any move to scrap a clean air zone before there is clear and sustained evidence of improved air quality would be both premature and reckless. Clean air zones were introduced to deliver compliance with legally binding air quality limits. Authorities are required to retain them until compliance has been achieved and maintained.
I hope I have reassured Members that these regulations will ensure that clean air zones continue to operate effectively and fairly. I therefore commend the regulations to the Committee.
Question put.
Road Safety: West Midlands
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon (Manuela Perteghella) on securing this important debate and I thank all hon. Members for their important contributions. I thank her for the clear and thoughtful way in which she articulated the road safety issues affecting her constituents and communities across the west midlands.
Road safety is a priority for this Government. In January we published the first road safety strategy in over a decade. Safer roads support economic growth, enable more sustainable and active travel, reduce pressures on our NHS, and ensure that people can travel safely and with confidence in their daily lives. I am grateful for the constructive tone of the debate, and I welcome the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Government.
As the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon set out so clearly, road safety is not an abstract issue—it is about people, families and communities. Every road death is a tragedy. Even today, around four people lose their lives on our roads every day and many more suffer life-changing injuries. Behind each statistic is a family whose life has been permanently altered. The vast majority of these collisions are avoidable. They are too often linked to behaviours such as speeding, drink and drug-driving, distraction and failure to wear seatbelts.
Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)
One of the key issues in my constituency is street racing. All over the Black Country we have young men driving in gangs, causing a menace and many accidents, so I was pleased that the combined authority had set up a High Court injunction to allow the police extra powers to tackle street racing, which caused a reduction in my area. However, I am concerned that both Dudley and Sandwell councils are withdrawing from that injunction, removing the police powers against police advice. Does the Minister have any advice for me or those councils on how they tackle street racing?
Simon Lightwood
I obviously urge all local authorities to do everything possible in their power to improve road safety, and I hope that they will consider very carefully their actions in this area.
While the number of casualties has fallen over the long term, progress has slowed in recent years. For too long, the situation has been accepted as inevitable. To those who shrug their shoulders and say, “Nothing more can be done,” this Government say clearly, “Enough is enough.” That is why our road safety strategy sets out a clear direction for change. It includes ambitious targets to reduce the number of people killed and seriously injured by 65%, and of children by 70%, by 2035. It puts road users at the heart of our approach.
We are taking action across the system. We are consulting on a minimum learning period for new drivers, strengthening motorcycle training, improving vehicle safety standards and ensuring tougher approaches to dangerous behaviours, including drink and drug driving. We will also establish a new road safety board to monitor delivery and drive progress, but we must go further, particularly for those who are most at risk.
In 2024, 31% of those killed on our roads were pedestrians or cyclists. Those numbers are simply too high, and we must design a system that better protects those people. That is why we will update the manual for streets to ensure that future road designs support people who walk, wheel and cycle to do so safely and with confidence.
We are also taking action to tackle work-related road risk. We will pilot a new national charter to improve safety for those who drive or ride as part of their job. It is estimated that more than 1,000 pedestrians were hit by working drivers last year. We will work with businesses to reduce work-related road risk and improve safety for all road users. Too many lives are affected by preventable incidents, and we are determined to change that.
A number of Members have raised concerns about speeding. For many communities, this is not just about statistics; it is about near-misses, fear and a sense that nothing happens until a tragedy occurs, and I understand that frustration. People should not have to wait for a serious injury or fatality before action is taken to improve safety. Speed is a key factor in both the likelihood and severity of collisions, and it is right that we continue to focus on it.
Local authorities have the powers to set speed limits, including 20 mph limits where appropriate, and to introduce traffic-calming measures. It is for them to determine what is appropriate in each case based on local knowledge and evidence, but we are supporting that work. We will update guidance on setting speed limits and the use of speed and red light cameras to ensure that authorities are able to take well-informed, proactive decisions.
The hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon represents a largely rural constituency, and she is right to draw attention to the specific risks on rural roads. Those roads often carry higher speeds, have different layouts and can lack the infrastructure found in urban areas. When collisions do occur, they are more likely to be serious. We recognise those challenges.
It is essential that local authorities are able to take targeted action on higher-risk routes and that decisions reflect the needs of rural communities as well as urban ones. That is why we are working to ensure that interventions are better targeted on the risks presented by different road groups, including rural routes, where the consequences of collisions can be the most severe. We are supporting local authorities through updated guidance and evidence to help them to manage those risks more effectively.
Let me turn specifically to the west midlands. I recognise both the challenges and the progress that has been made. The region has a really complex road network, with busy urban centres, strategic routes and rural roads serving dispersed communities. That brings a range of risks, but this is a region showing really strong leadership. I welcome the commitment of the West Midlands combined authority to Vision Zero and the work being taken forward through its road safety action plan.
My colleague the Minister for Local Transport has visited the west midlands and was able to meet with the road safety commissioner. The appointment of the UK’s first road safety commissioner is a significant step in driving that work forward, alongside increased enforcement activity and the use of technology in high-risk locations. This kind of partnership working between local authorities, police and regional bodies is exactly what we need to see. Our role as a Government is to support that work through funding, guidance and a strong national framework, and we will continue to do that.
Enforcement is a critical part of improving road safety. Police forces, including West Midlands police, are responsible for deploying resources based on local priorities and risks. Their work—targeting dangerous, careless and inconsiderate driving—is essential to deterring unsafe behaviour and keeping communities safe. Technology also has an increasing role to play, whether that is through enforcement tools or vehicle safety systems that help prevent collisions or reduce their severity. We will continue to support both effective enforcement and the responsible use of new technologies.
Tragically, young drivers remain over-represented in road casualty statistics. We must strike the right balance between keeping young people safe and supporting their ability to access work, education and opportunities. Graduated driving licences and their implementation vary around the world—there is not one standard type. We are consulting on introducing a minimum learning period for England, Scotland and Wales, to make sure learner drivers get the necessary time and training to prepare themselves for a lifetime of driving. We already have a two-year probationary period for all novice drivers once they have passed their test, and we are now seeking views on a lower blood alcohol limit for novice drivers in England and Wales.
Let me turn now to some of the other points raised. The hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon raised the issue of data at the outset of her speech. She was referring to STATS19 having near-miss data; we have no plans to change that. STATS19 is the form that the police use to record details when they attend collisions that involve a casualty. On the specific issue of schools, road safety around schools, particularly the safety of children travelling to and from school, is a priority for this Government. Of course, protection for children is not limited to the immediate school frontage—national transport policy focuses on improving safety along the whole journey commonly made by children and young people, including school routes.
Rachel Taylor
Does the Minister agree that the leader of Warwickshire county council consulting the public on whether children should walk up to 8 miles to and from school was a bad move?
Simon Lightwood
I will leave it to the local transport authority to make those kinds of calls, but I urge it to make sure that the safety of children is of paramount importance when making those decisions.
The approach we are describing includes the use of 20 mph limits where appropriate, alongside safer crossing facilities, traffic-calming measures, school streets schemes, enforcement and school travel planning. We support delivery of those measures through national funding, which includes £7.3 billion of capital funding for local highways maintenance. The hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon also mentioned her concern about her local authority, saying that five fatalities need to take place before it takes action. I can say categorically that that is not the case—local authorities do not have to wait for any fatalities before taking action to improve their roads.
Improving road safety is not the responsibility of one organisation alone. It requires action from Government, local authorities, enforcement agencies and road users themselves.
Lee Pitcher
I am sorry, Madam Deputy Speaker— I have made lots of interventions today, but this issue is really important to me. On the topic of new developments, Warren Park estate in my area has had new roads for a long time, but some of the markings are not there. The developer and the highways authority need to work together; will the Minister encourage them to do so? There is one specific junction that is particularly dangerous. Will he join me in pushing them to resolve that issue as soon as possible?
Simon Lightwood
I very much hope that those people will have heard my hon. Friend’s message and will take action to ensure that everybody is safe using the roads.
As I was saying, road safety is not the responsibility of one organisation alone; it requires action from Government, from local authorities, from enforcement agencies and from road users themselves. This Government are determined to reduce road deaths and serious injuries on our roads. Through our road safety strategy, through stronger local partnerships and through a renewed focus on the causes of collisions, we are taking a more determined and more proactive approach. I assure the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon that the concerns she has raised today will be carefully considered and that we will continue to work closely with partners across the west midlands to support further progress. I once again thank her for securing this important debate.
Question put and agreed to.
Small Towns: Transport Links
Simon Lightwood Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster 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
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Roger. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) on securing the debate, and thank all Members for their insightful contributions. If I do not manage to get to all the individual points, I will follow them up with hon. Members.
My hon. Friend has spoken consistently about the importance of reliable and affordable transport connections for communities across Rossendale and Darwen. For too long, small towns have been held back by poor connectivity, whether because of limited bus services, unreliable rail links or the day-to-day frustrations of deteriorating local roads. We are determined to change that.
My hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters) talked about connectivity. Transport in this country has been fragmented for too long. Through the Better Connected strategy, we are changing that. We are setting out a national vision for an integrated, accessible and safe transport network that people can rely on to make the journeys they need to make easily, wherever they live across England. By taking a holistic approach to transport, we can make a real difference for communities through improved connectivity, integrated ticketing and improved cross-modal connections, so that even those without direct rail links are connected to the wider network. Transport should feel like a single joined-up system, not a series of disconnected parts.
Local leaders are key to delivering this vision. They know the transport challenges their areas face and are best placed to decide how to improve transport in their areas. We are backing local leaders in every local transport authority to make improvements by providing £21 billion of local transport funding through simplified multi-year funding settlements.
Wendy Morton
Picking up on the point I raised in my contribution, if the Government are working with mayors and local authorities to deliver transport, will the Minister commit to working with me to get some answers from Mayor Parker to deliver Aldridge train station? Yes or no?
Simon Lightwood
I am sure that the right hon. Lady is quite capable of representing her constituents directly with the Mayor of the West Midlands, and I gently remind her that she was Transport Secretary at one point, and could have done some of this work herself during that time.
Simon Lightwood
I will not—I have to make progress.
The majority of local transport funding is allocated by formula to give a fair share of funding for all areas. For example, our formulas take into account the length of roads, population size and rurality, so that funding reflects an area’s circumstances and need.
Simon Lightwood
I have a lot to get through, so I am going to push on.
The multi-year settlements will give areas the certainty they need to plan ahead, so that they are more flexible and local leaders can invest in the transport priorities that are right for their areas. Places with an elected mayor will benefit from either integrated settlements or a single mayoral transport fund, giving them more flexibility over how they use their funding. That reflects the fact that mayors are recognisable figures in their areas and accountable to their citizens, with mandates to represent them on the national stage. However, local transport authorities without a mayor will also benefit from simplified funding and will receive transformative multi-year flexible integrated transport funds and bus services funding. To support local leaders further, we published updated local transport plan guidance earlier this year, setting out what we expect local transport authorities to deliver in their areas and how to make the most of their transport funding.
Improvements to buses are vital, particularly for communities in small towns, communities in rural areas and—I say this before my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume) gives me the look—coastal communities. Buses are the only transport option in some places, but through the Bus Services Act 2025 we have given local leaders the tools they need to ensure that local bus services meet the needs of local people. These tools are accessible not only to mayoral authorities, but to all local transport authorities across England, with the Department for Transport providing support through the franchising support fund and franchising pilots programme. This work includes funding to develop pilot programmes that test different models of franchising through a small number of rural LTAs.
DFT is also funding a franchising expert group, which will provide expert support and advice on bus franchising to authorities and could be engaged to aid with troubleshooting and challenges such as cross-border services, which we addressed in the Bus Services Act but are important for local areas to consider when drawing up their bus service improvement plans. As well as targeted franchising support, we are providing meaningful funding to support and improve bus networks—a total of £3 billion over the next three years.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
The Minister mentions the new pilots, and I place on the record my thanks for the fact that Cumberland is one of those areas. Is he aware that Cumberland council is already using the money that the Government have given it? It has introduced a series of bus links, including the HW1 bus route, which offers visitors the opportunity to visit our historic, wonderful Hadrian’s Wall. May I invite the Minister to join me on that bus? Roman togas are optional.
Simon Lightwood
I am afraid my Roman toga is at the dry cleaners, but I would like to take up my hon. Friend’s offer at some point soon.
The hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) talked about the challenges in West Yorkshire, which I absolutely understand. I am sure that he will welcome the move by Mayor Tracy Brabin to introduce the Weaver network, and that he is as excited as I am to see the difference that it will make.
To ensure that rural areas are not disadvantaged, the individual allocations were determined using a revised formula that considered the needs of each local transport authority, taking into account population size, levels of deprivation, bus service provision and, for the first time, rurality.
The hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine) asked about ensuring that all areas can take advantage of bus franchising. Back in September 2024, I laid a statutory instrument that opened up bus franchising to all local transport authorities—one of the first things I did on coming into government. Lancashire combined county authority’s funding settlement includes £56 million for buses, which can be used to enhance local bus services in rural areas.
Active travel has a really important role to play, particularly in making shorter journeys to shops, GP practices and leisure facilities in our towns. Funding for high-quality active travel infrastructure is critical, and this Government are providing significant investment. In December, we announced £626 million for local authorities between 2026-27 and 2029-30 to deliver walking, wheeling and cycling schemes—enough for 500 miles of new walking and cycling routes. That is in addition to almost £300 million of funding announced in February 2025 and a further £108 million in March 2026.
My hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen mentioned pavement parking. The Government are taking action to ensure that pavements are for people, including parents with young children, people using wheelchairs and those with sight loss—everyone. We will legislate to allow local transport authorities to prohibit pavement parking. They will also have powers to exempt locations where pavement parking would still be necessary to ensure traffic flow, such as narrow streets, and we will monitor the effectiveness of these measures through baselining and evaluation of research.
The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), has some cheek to talk about potholes! For many constituents, the most visible sign of under-investment is the condition of highways. We are taking action to support local authorities in tackling the pothole plague inherited from the previous Government, including by providing a record £7.3 billion of multi-year funding for highways—it will have almost doubled by the end of this Parliament. We are clear that local authorities should focus on long-term preventive maintenance, as well as long-lasting repairs.
However, I recognise that smaller and more rural communities are particularly vulnerable to disruption caused by street works. Lane rental can play an important role in tackling such disruption by allowing highway authorities to charge those carrying out works up to £2,500 per day when they occupy the busiest roads at the busiest times. That creates a clear incentive to plan works more effectively, shift activity outside peak periods and complete works more quickly. The Government strongly support the continued roll-out of lane rental, and we are currently finalising our assessment of 13 further applications. At the same time, we are developing approval powers for mayors of strategic authorities. That will support faster, more responsive delivery of schemes while reducing congestion, improving journey reliability and improving disruption.
Rail has a critical role to play and was mentioned numerous times by Members. I am sure that the Rail Minister will have heard about all the individual schemes mentioned today, so I will not go into them, but connecting small towns is critical for the wider economy. Reliable commuter rail services can transform opportunities, making it easier for people to access jobs in nearby cities while continuing to live in the communities that they value. We are working with industry partners to improve the reliability and performance of commuter routes and ensure that smaller stations are not overlooked. That includes looking at how timetables, capacity and infrastructure can better support passengers travelling to and from smaller towns, including those in Lancashire.
My hon. Friend is a great champion for the people of Rossendale and Darwen. He will be aware that the Department is not currently funding any development work on either of the proposals that he mentioned, but my officials are very happy to support Lancashire county combined authority should any local funding be prioritised on either the City Valley rail link or the new station at Lower Darwen.
The Government are also committed to ensuring that non-mayoral authorities are fully engaged in GBR’s work and not disadvantaged as the new rail system is implemented. All tiers of local government will benefit from an empowered local GBR business unit that is outward-facing and engages local authorities on their priorities and their local transport plans. That structure will provide a single point of accountability for local authorities, rather than baking in the fragmented structure that we have today.
That engagement will ensure that there is sufficient opportunity for local authorities to collaborate with GBR on their priorities and consider their proposals. That approach is designed to ensure that GBR is as close as possible to local communities so that it can understand and respond to their needs, while being clear that they are part of a national system that needs to work coherently as a whole.
My hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Linsey Farnsworth) rightly raised rail fares, which are a real concern for many passengers, especially when services are unreliable. The current fare system is complex and confusing, and passengers do not always trust that they are getting the right ticket. We are simplifying fares and ticketing so that passengers can easily find the best fare for their journey and get more consistent offers across the network under Great British Railways. Alongside reform, we have also frozen regulated fares for the first time in 30 years, which will help with the cost of living while improving reliability and service quality.
In closing, I reiterate my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen for securing this debate and to all Members for their contributions today. Improving transport in small towns is central to this Government’s mission to drive growth and opportunity across the whole country. We know there is more to do, but we are already taking meaningful steps to ensure that wherever possible, wherever people live, whether that be in a city, a rural area, a small town or a coastal town, they have access to the reliable, affordable and integrated transport that they deserve.