PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Improving Public Transport - 5 December 2024 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the matter of improving public transport.

I begin by thanking the Backbench Business Committee for scheduling this important and timely debate. The Government have recognised the need for a modal shift away from cars to public transport, but we are still a long way from achieving this aspiration. The Government aim to change the way the railways and bus services operate in the UK, so we stand at a crossroads, making it increasingly important that we head in the right direction.

As Members will know, transport is a key contributor to climate change and the release of greenhouse gases. The transport sector is responsible for more than a quarter of total UK emissions and is the single most polluting domestic sector, but all public transport combined —buses, trams, shared mobility—accounts for only 9% of these emissions, with that number falling every year.

Improved public transport plays a huge role in delivering growth to local and regional communities, but all too often public transport is a barrier to economic inclusion in rural areas. We know that better local integrated transport systems deliver growth and opportunity—two of the Government’s five missions. Data from the Local Government Association found that a 1% improvement in public transport journey times could support a nearly 1% reduction in employment deprivation. The Government’s own return on investment tool shows that helping someone back into work provides a £3,500 boost to their income while the national Government benefits by £11,400 and wider society by £23,000.

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. Does she agree that the single biggest reason that people fail to access work in rural areas is public transport? The figures that she has given are not just numbers; it benefits somebody’s whole way of life if they can access work because they can catch the bus there.

I entirely agree, and I will address that point in my speech.

Poor public transport compounds social ills, while the unreliability, inaccessibility and lack of integration in rural Britain prevent people from trusting that it can get them where they need to go when they need to go there and, crucially, that they can get home again. Somerset has the worst bus services in the country, forcing communities into isolation or locking them into expensive and polluting car usage. My constituents from areas that are currently served by the railways are concerned about the impact of building Old Oak Common and how it will disrupt travel to London. Many residents who travel from Castle Cary to London face up to a decade of disruption as a result of those works. I would welcome it if the Minister commented on how that will be mitigated.

I would also like to mention the future of South Western Railway, after the decision was made recently to renationalise the company in May 2025. It will be the largest train operating company ever to be nationalised in the UK, and that will happen before Great British Railways, the body that will oversee the public operator, is operational. In just a few months, the Department will, in effect, take responsibility for hundreds of millions of extra journeys, and my constituents travelling on the Exeter St David’s to Waterloo line from Templecombe or nearby stations are anxious about the future of the trains that they rely on. I would welcome it if the Minister commented on that, too.

I have spoken many times in this place about the reintroduction of a station in the Somerton and Langport area, and I thank the Langport Transport Group for its hard work and tenacity in trying to bring a railway station to the area after it lost its stations during the Beeching cuts of the 1960s. The Somerton and Langport area has the longest stretch of rail between London and Cornwall that is not served by a railway station. The Langport Transport Group prepared a proposal to the restoring your railway fund and won £50,000 to develop a strategic outline case alongside Somerset council, which they submitted in February 2022. Despite this huge effort, they have never heard back, even after I pressed both the former Prime Minister and the Transport Secretary in the last Parliament for an answer. Now that that scheme has been cancelled by the Chancellor, local residents feel that they are in limbo.

Having a railway station in the Somerton and Langport area makes so much sense. It would serve the 50,000 people who live nearby who currently are not served by the railway line that runs right through their community. Nearby stations such as Castle Cary, Taunton, Bridgwater and Yeovil Junction are all at least 12 to 15 miles away. There is no direct bus to Castle Cary or Taunton, where it is then a hike to the nearest station. That is hardly an incentive to travel, and it illustrates the lack of integrated public transport in Somerset—a topic I will speak on later.

A railway station in the area would do more than connect residents to the rail line. It could also boost the local economy, bringing in more visitors. We have seen nearby passenger numbers at Castle Cary—the official railway station for the Glastonbury festival—jump massively in recent years, from 152,000 in 2002-03 to 251,000 in 2017-18. I may have a slight bias, but there are so many reasons for people to stop and visit the area, if only there were a train station. For example, there is the River Parrett trail, a scenic 50-mile walk that is home to some of lowland England’s most beautiful and unchanged landscapes.

As I mentioned, the proposal was cast into doubt after the Government announced the cancellation of the restoring your railway fund in the summer. We are still waiting for an update on what will happen to the project. I would welcome the Minister’s comments regarding the Somerton and Langport railway.

I thank my hon. Friend for raising such an important topic for us all, and in particular for my constituents in Bicester and Woodstock. After the Conservative-led administration cut all direct bus funding in our area in 2016, I am proud that Liberal Democrats have reinstated community bus services. Does she agree that it is incredibly important that the Government’s new plans for public transport not only focus on metropolitan areas but provide adequate funding so that these dislocated areas can access community bus transport, using new technology for demand-led and cost-effective services for our residents?

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. That is vital for rural areas. I have excellent community transport providers in Glastonbury and Somerton: there is Wincanton community transport, and across Somerset we have the Slinky bus that provides on-demand services. They are crucial for people who need to get to surgery appointments and even their jobs, as well as for getting people out and about, and breaking down that rural isolation.

Moving on to integrated transport, if we must wait longer for a station in the Langport and Somerton area, it is crucial that in the meantime the area receives an integrated public transport system to nearby railway stations in the form of rail-bus links. The former Transport Secretary, the right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh), on the day before her departure, set out a vision for more integrated public transport systems. I hope that the new Secretary of State will keep those aims alive, as that is desperately needed in Somerset.

Fragmented transport leaves a traveller trying to get from Wincanton to Castle Cary having to take a bus journey and then walk half a mile to the station to catch a train, with no integration between the bus timetable and the train times. In nearby Devon, local bus operators, the council and Great Western Railway have worked together to launch rail-bus links with improved timetables that correspond with mainline train services, alongside improved service brand visibility. That serves as an example of how integrated rail-bus links can work in rural areas and service communities that do not have a train station.

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this important debate to the Chamber. In my constituency, GWR has been working with the borough and county councils on a new cycle link. Network Rail, unfortunately, is singularly blocking the development. That strategic cycle link will probably not be completed unless Network Rail, which owns the land, gets out the way. Does she agree that different arms of government need to be working together much more strongly and that cultural change in Network Rail is required if we are to solve these problems in public transport and active travel?

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend. Integration between public transport and active travel is vital. He and I live in a beautiful part of the world, which frankly more people should get out and enjoy on two wheels or on two feet.

There are huge opportunities to improve bus services around the country, and especially in Somerset, where they are almost endless—mind you, the starting point is quite low. In 2022, Somerset county council’s bus service improvement plan bid acknowledged that Somerset had the worst-rated bus service in the country at the time, and that was after 13 years of lack of investment under a Conservative-led administration. Bus provision is poor and unreliable.

For example, the 54 bus route, which runs through Glastonbury and Somerton connecting Taunton to Yeovil, lacks an evening or Saturday service. That leaves people who might work unpredictable or unsociable hours unable to trust the bus service and reliant on a private car. Cherie in Glastonbury told me that she has to wait for an hour for her bus home from work, so despite finishing at 5 pm she does not get home until nearly half-past 7. If she were to drive, it would take her 10 minutes.

The unreliability of buses combined with the poor state of bus stops and public information provides a major hurdle for bus users. I thank Somerset bus partnership for its unrelenting work to improve that, having held more than 100 bus stalls to inform local people about their nearest services, filling an information gap that has sadly been left by the service providers. Most bus stops do not have a printed sign timetable or real-time information, and often poor mobile connectivity in rural areas makes it difficult for people to access information online. That was confirmed recently by Iain, who told me that the printed bus timetable in Glastonbury is barely legible. That is so disappointing. Even small interventions could create vastly important changes that would support bus services.

A Campaign for Better Transport survey has found that 52% of people would use more buses if they had better information at bus stops, but the onus on providing that information is sadly lacking. Unlike rail, where there are national standards that mandate that a certain level of information is provided at stations, there is no equivalent for bus stops. Every rail station in Britain has provision for real-time information, but we are a million miles away from achieving similar provision for our bus network. Bus users need certainty, but the availability of up-to-date, co-ordinated information on the bus network is lacking at the best of times and non- existent at the worst of times. That must change.

One of the major barriers preventing simple things like clear information is the fractured nature of bus funding. The previous Government’s competitive strategy turned funding into a postcode lottery, with only 40% of eligible local authorities receiving any of the £1.2 billion of BSIP funding announced in 2021. The Liberal Democrats have been calling for a simplified system of bus funding that could deliver routes where there is local need. Funding is unequal and fractured. Somerset Council receives around £25 per head of funding for buses, yet 12 local authorities across the country get double that amount.

The former Transport Secretary recently announced a big increase in bus funding, with Somerset council receiving £6.5 million. The increase is very welcome, but it will not go far enough to fix the gaping holes in our bus provision. Somerset council also awaits guidance from the Government on what the money can be used for, so that it can prioritise where the need is greatest. The previous Transport Secretary was keen for local authorities to decide where the money is most needed, and I hope that that remains the case.

The Government’s vision for the future of buses appears to be based around franchising and delivering London-style buses around the country. As I stated, better buses are key to achieving a modal shift, hitting net zero targets and delivering opportunity and growth. But with the local authority landscape as it is, franchising simply is not an option in rural areas. If there is not significant funding, franchising is no more than a pipe dream for rural authorities. Somerset council has only three officers to deal with public transport, which is not enough people power to run such an operation. That is not an anomaly, but a local authority standard. If the current situation does not work for rural areas, what is the vision?

I hope that the recent removal of the £2 bus fare cap is not the start of things to come for rural areas. Given the nature of rural bus routes, journeys are longer and people travel further. If the now £3 cap were to be removed, it would be disastrous for rural areas, as prices would rise beyond affordable rates very quickly and disincentivise regular bus patronage. After the 50% fare increase, one constituent from North Cadbury wrote to me concerned about the impact it will have on the future of the No. 1 bus from Yeovil to Shepton Mallet, and the No. 58 in Wincanton, which are both facing cancellation. Those routes, and many like them, are vital for social and economic outcomes.

In the last Session, I introduced the Public Transport (Rural Areas) Bill, which would have created minimum service levels, ensuring that residents can access sites of employment, education and leisure. I believe that those measures are truly needed for rural areas.

Does the hon. Lady accept that the previous Government had not actually funded the £2 fare cap beyond the current period? Therefore, we have a cap on bus fares so that people do not to end up with exponential fare rises in the next spending period.

The point is that if prices go up any further, patronage on buses will go down, and in rural areas we travel further and longer. It is difficult to incentivise people to use buses in rural areas, so we need to get this right, and increasing fares will not encourage more people to get out of their cars and on to public transport.

Local authorities have a duty to outline routes that cannot run commercially but are vital to improving social outcomes or supporting economic activity, but there is no duty on them to fund those routes. After the general election, there were suggestions that the Government would create safeguards to make it harder for routes to be cut, and the better bus Bill is the perfect opportunity to deliver that. The previous Government committed to delivering guidance on the meaning and role of socially necessary services, expanding the category to include economically necessary services. But unsurprisingly, they failed to provide it, leaving much-needed bus routes in danger. I hope the Minister will take this up and provide some guidance.

Improving public transport is essential. The Government have stated their intention to improve it but so much remains unclear, especially for rural areas, which see poor services and high costs. Unfortunately, without investment and smart choices, that will continue to be the reality. The reversal of these trends is crucial, and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response.

I call Alex Mayer to make her maiden speech.

I am delighted to be called to give my maiden speech, and I do so with a sense of trepidation and excitement, which I imagine that many a new MP feels. It has struck me that maiden speeches are a little like buses: you wait ages, and then 335 of them turn up at once. I beg your indulgence, Madam Deputy Speaker, to listen to one more as we near the end of this journey.

As hon. Members will know, the excellent House of Commons Library helpfully provides us with the maiden speeches of our last two predecessors, to give us a feel for this place and to acknowledge the work of those who came before us. Mr Selous served for a whopping 23 years, and I pay tribute to his work as an assiduous constituency representative who stood up for what he believed in. I discovered in his maiden speech that he in turn referred to his predecessor who served for 31 years, who in turn harked back to the Member who came before him—the last Labour MP for the area—who was elected back in 1966. Clearly, 1966 was a year that was rather good for teams in red, albeit followed by rather too many years of hurt.

History shows us how rarely change comes for these communities, yet change is desperately needed: on shop- lifting, I have met workers who have been spat at, threatened with needles and even a gun; the lack of healthcare facilities, including in Houghton Regis and Leighton-Linslade; sewage polluting our waterways; and transport. I am delighted to be a member of the Transport Committee, and transport is the subject of the debate, which I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing.

My constituency has a long history of transport innovation. It has Britain’s oldest road, dating back to prehistoric times, the Icknield way, which runs through the constituency. It has the Grand Union canal, the freight superhighway of its day. Leighton Buzzard railway once transported sand from quarries and is now a much-loved tourism attraction, going full steam ahead. More recently, we have one of the longest guided busways in Europe, which I hope one day can be extended. That brings me neatly to the topic of buses and encouraging more people to switch on to them, which is so vital in this time of climate emergency.

I welcome the BSIP investment announced recently by the Government, and I look forward to hearing more from the Minister about plans to allow more local areas to have a smoother path to franchising. I am keen for the Minister to look carefully at transport governance. London and Greater Manchester, which have franchising already, have also historically had alignment of transport powers, resources and capacity all in one centralised place. Passenger transport executives and their equivalents can accelerate the delivery of transport plans and play a crucial role in unlocking regional economic growth. For 50 years, such structures have benefited from much higher levels of control and co-ordination of buses. They also benefit from running over a much more logical functional economic geography.

Outside such areas, transport powers are held in many different places, and they require a number of organisations to independently agree reforms to enact change. That can mean, for example, that bus stops, which are surely the window to the soul of buses, can be owned by an organisation with no say in how the bus service itself is run. In many places in the country, highways and transport powers are split. We perhaps need more passenger transport executives, although the Urban Transport Group advises that the last passenger transport executive was established so long ago—not quite so long ago as when a Labour MP last represented Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard—that the mechanics around establishing a new one are unclear.

In any case, we need governance that is fit for the 21st century, with the right delegated functions being granted to a passenger transport executive or equivalent, and the establishment of an executive function to speed up decision making and delivery that makes the difference. It needs to be based on a geography that reflects travel patterns as well as wider social and economic geographies, and which gives a large enough base to raise farebox income.

On geography, I argue that there need to be possibilities to franchise in areas larger than local transport authorities. Given that franchising is not entirely a silver bullet, I urge the Minister to look at the geography of enhanced partnerships as well. It is only one bus, but the F70, which travels from Luton to Milton Keynes via Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard, goes through three separate enhanced partnership areas.

Finally, I thank Grant Palmer, Arriva and First, which have invited me aboard their buses recently, and Dawsongroup for bringing a double-decker bus just outside Parliament for Catch the Bus Month, which many hon. Members from across the House came to support. It is my belief, really, that every month should be Catch the Bus Month. I urge all hon. Members to get on board and back our local buses all year round.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her maiden speech, which was lovely to hear. She kept on the theme of buses as well, which is very impressive.

There is a puzzle with rural bus services that needs to be solved. Local residents will all say they are desperate to save their village bus service from closure, yet the local operator will say that footfall keeps going down year on year, and there simply is not enough public subsidy to fill the gap. If everyone wants to use the bus, why are they not actually doing it? The answer is a mix of two things. It is partly the price, but, even more so, it is the service. Service frequency does not sufficiently meet the needs of residents, so they do not take the bus.

Bus services have been in decline ever since Thatcher’s privatisation in the 1980s. While increased car use was always going to have an impact, bus services should have bottomed out years ago. In practice, what we have left today are mostly legacy routes designed to meet the needs of communities from decades ago. We have seen a process of death by a thousand cuts, with incremental cuts in frequency making the bus option less user friendly every year. Across many villages in my constituency of Horsham, it is just not practical any more to rely on buses to get to work. When surveyed in 2021, more than 80% of West Sussex residents said they did not use the bus due to a lack of route options or the infrequency of services.

Gradually, anyone who needs dependable public transport is forced out of rural areas to be replaced by car users, which, in turn, reduces bus usage even further—and the downward spiral continues. As a result, in Horsham and across West Sussex, the local authority has for many years presided over a policy of managed decline, with no serious attempt to reverse or even stabilise things.

This summer, the residents of Partridge Green, a village in the south of my constituency, were surprised to discover that they were about to lose their direct link to Horsham via the No. 17 bus. They learned this with just a couple of weeks’ notice. Nobody consulted them or warned them; they found it out only by studying the new bus timetable when it was issued. Public anger was mainly directed at the local bus operator, but I have to ask: what do we actually expect to happen? It is a private company that needs to make a profit, and the figures said that the cut had to be made. We cannot expect private companies to behave like social enterprises.

Partridge Green residents reacted to the news with an impressive public campaign, which is still ongoing. I attended a large public meeting that had a fair percentage of the entire village population crammed into the local church, and something I heard there really struck me: if only the residents had known the service was in danger, they would have got together to help it, either by using the bus more frequently themselves or by finding some other compromise. However, West Sussex county council gave the residents no warning, so they never had a chance.

This is the killer app we are missing out on: we need to harness the passion of communities to protect their local amenities. Loss of bus services is not the only problem these communities face. Villages are suffering from the removal of banking services, shops, pharmacies, post offices, pubs—you name it. They know they are in a battle, but they are also really motivated to help if only we actually ask them. That may be part of the answer to the long-term decline in service. We need to start by asking what kind of service residents actually want, and what they would use if it actually existed.

I welcome Government promises of increased local funding and control over public transport, but I hope the Government will be realistic in their assessment of local authority capability, when two fifths of councils are on the verge of bankruptcy. We have been fighting a long defensive battle, and, frankly, we have been losing. If we are to have any hope of reversing that, we need a mechanism to go back to the people who actually live in these villages today, and reconstruct the services from the ground up.

I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing the debate. When I originally signed up to speak in it, it was about the south-west. I do not know what changed, but obviously national transport is very important. I feel that the south-west does sometimes get missed in conversations, but I hope that with the appointment of my right hon. Friend the Member for Swindon South (Heidi Alexander) as Transport Secretary that might change a little bit. After some of the speeches we have heard today, it will come as no shock to anyone that I am going to talk about rural transport and the need for integration.

This issue is an odd one for me. My constituency has an urban area of Swindon, and then a rural area which includes Inglesham, Highworth, Blunsdon and Castle Eaton. The two areas are completely different. We have one bus company, and in the urban area of Swindon we get it right—I do not get complaints from residents. Sometimes in Queens Drive I get a complaint about a double decker looking into a garden, but at least there is still a double decker going past. When I speak to rural residents, however, they often raise the point that they want and need to use public transport—it is good for their children and for accessing to education, hospitals and the town centre—but they simply cannot, and that is forcing them to use cars.

I will keep my speech brief, because a lot of Members want to talk, but does the House not agree that if we are to incentivise people to ditch the car and get on public transport, we need an integrated transport system that focuses on rural areas to ensure we can get access to buses when we need them?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing the debate on this important topic.

As the Member for the Guildford constituency, I could probably bore for the south-east of England when it comes to the public transport challenges we face. I recognise that in comparison with colleagues from across the House we do have very good public transport, but it still is not good enough and my residents regularly get in touch with me to tell me so. For too long, our transport networks were neglected by the previous Conservative Government, leaving transport users frustrated by delays, poor accessibility and high costs. For us to achieve the greener, fairer and more thriving future that I am sure all of us here want for our communities, high-quality public transport is essential.

In my consistency of Guildford, we have two long-proposed railway stations: Guildford West and Merrow. These stations were first suggested 10 years ago and we have had barely any progress. The main reason? Funding. Or, rather, the lack of funding. For those not in the know, building a railway station costs upwards of £25 million, with at least half of that spent on planning before a single shovel breaks the ground. That financial barrier has left residents waiting far longer than they should for essential infrastructure.

Yet even as we struggle to deliver new stations, existing ones remain inaccessible for too many. I am, of course, talking about the issue of step-free access. In my constituency, stations such as Clandon, Effingham Junction and Horsley still lack basic accessibility for my residents to be able to access the train in their rural area. Instead, they have to go to other, larger places such as Guildford and Dorking. We must support those in wheelchairs, but step-free access is also about making life easier for parents with prams, people with invisible mobility challenges and anyone who finds steps a barrier. Without doing so, we prevent people from choosing greener public transport.

That is a matter of fairness and inclusion but, just like the new stations, it comes with a significant price tag. With the news this week that South Western Railway will be moving to public ownership next year, it is my sincere hope that the urgent improvements we need will start to take place and we will see an end to accessibility deserts. But railways are just one part of the public transport puzzle. In the villages of my constituency, like many rural and semi-rural areas, buses are a lifeline for residents and businesses, yet far too often routes are being cut, services are deeply unreliable and communities are being left isolated.

From our extensive experience in local government, those of us on the Liberal Democrat Benches know that local solutions work best. That is why, personally, I would like the Government to look at empowering borough, district, town and parish councils to run their own localised bus services, not just the county level transport authorities. These councils know their communities and can deliver the targeted services that people need. I have spoken to people running some of the larger town and parish councils, and they would like at least the opportunity to consider commercial shuttle bus services. Some of them have the financial potential to do so, but cannot because it is currently illegal. It is in the gift of the Government to change that.

Along with a number of my Liberal Democrat colleagues, I have campaigned for many years for solutions to our public transport woes. My constituents completely understand the frustration shared by everyone else in the country about the delays and the difficulties that result from the inadequacy of public transport. The answer is, of course, investment. I have said this before to Conservative colleagues, and I say it again now: “Please don’t be shy. Borrow our ideas, and with those ideas—for our manifesto is always fully costed—we can deliver railway stations, we can deliver step-free access, and we can deliver buses for residents, communities and businesses, so that our communities can thrive.”

I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for initiating the debate, and I also commend my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for her excellent maiden speech.

Public transport, including buses, is a bit of a passion of mine. I am from Stroud, and there are many small villages in my constituency—including Dursley and Wotton-under-Edge, to name just two—so I know that public transport is about more than infrastructure. It represents a range of opportunities. It is about equality and community, and that is particularly true of rural areas, because it tends to run as a lifeline for many local residents. Under successive Conservative Governments rural bus services have been run down, and it is interesting today to observe the attention being paid to the subject of public transport on the Opposition Benches. There has been a staggering 27% reduction in bus services since 2011, and in rural areas there is a £420 million shortfall. However—to answer the hon. Lady’s question—I am encouraged by the fact that we are investing £1 billion in improving bus services, including £8 million designated for Gloucestershire.

As a little aside, may I mention Stroudwater station, which was closed in the 1960s? I agree with the hon. Lady about small railway stations of that kind. They cost a great deal to develop, but when money allows and when we have got ourselves out of our current financial hole, it will be fantastic if we can invest in small stations.

The impact of nearly four decades of deregulation on our public transport system has left many communities stripped of any public transport or at the very least, of any accessibility or affordable bus services. I am therefore delighted that this Government plan to restore power to local communities, enabling local leaders to set fares, determine routes and establish timetables, taking control away from unaccountable private operators. However, I urge the Minister to confirm that rural areas without an elected mayor will have equal opportunities to benefit from the shift towards community-controlled bus services.

Wotton-under-Edge had a lifeline of a bus service, the 84/85 going south to Bristol. The problem was that it crossed a boundary line between a combined authority area and Gloucestershire. Its cancellation has caused havoc for schoolchildren, as well as those who cannot get to work, cannot get to doctors’ surgeries and cannot get to hospitals. People have written to me saying they have had to turn down job offers. That is how important rural bus services are. A key issue in this instance was the lack of co-ordination between local authorities. It seems petty, but this is a major problem. The funding for that cross-border bus service was lost because local leaders failed to reach an agreement. That is an example of the extent to which fragmentation can affect rural public transport.

Let me end by describing one of the pleasures of my week. I leave this place, take the train to Stroud and then get on to my favourite bus, the 65. I sit on the top, and I ride over Selsley common to my home. It is an utter joy, and a joy that is shared by my two-year-old granddaughter, who absolutely loves buses. So let us develop rural public transport, and take it back to what it was in the past.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing this debate. Our public transport services have been run down for years because of the previous Conservative Government, and many rural communities across my Thornbury and Yate constituency have seen their vital bus services disappear. To rub salt into the wound, we have seen money spent on gimmicks that are aimed at delivering headlines rather than saving the services we rely on.

My constituents were looking forward to the new Government offering them hope, but one of their first actions was to hike the bus fare cap, which is so vital in rural areas, where journeys are long and fractured, and the Government have committed to the cap only for the next year. I welcome the announcement of more funding for services that are subsidised by combined and local authorities, but for it to be effective, it must be targeted at restoring our rural services, rather than being funnelled into already well served urban areas. In the west of England, funding has been prioritised for urban areas such as Bristol, where increasing the frequency of services boosts the number of passenger journeys more. As long as the focus is purely on passenger journey numbers, rather than ensuring that everyone has a basic minimum service that enables access to work, education and health services, our rural areas will miss out.

One of the half-baked solutions to the reduction in mainstream, regularly scheduled services has been to roll out an on-demand bus service called WESTlink. Although on-demand services can work, WESTlink is being used locally to do far more than any on-demand service can reasonably be expected to do, and the delivery of the service has been poor. Bad experiences have led to people losing confidence in it, because no one wants to be stranded and to have to pay a fortune for a taxi. People have told me that they have booked the service to get from A to B, only to find that they are the only passenger on board.

The situation is even more ridiculous when we consider that some WESTlink services are filling the gap left by the axing of bus routes that children and teenagers used to get to school or college. Parents repeatedly have to call up to book what should be a consistent daily service to get young people to and from their place of learning. It is simply a waste of time and resources to manage the service in this way. To quote one parent,

“I know there is a WESTlink available to book every day, but with the WESTlink only able to have a small number of passengers—and it is never on time or takes us somewhere completely different before taking us to school—it’s leaving parents with the fear of being fined.”

I have tried in vain to raise this issue with the West of England combined authority, both in my time in this place and in my previous role as the leader of South Gloucestershire council, but each time we are met with the same answer: “There’s no funding.” That shows the core weakness of the system. Routes that are commercially sustainable are run by bus companies, which absorb the profits, and the less-used but equally important rural routes are left in the hands of local authorities. Local government has had its funding cut to the bone during more than a decade of Conservative rule in Westminster, and it simply cannot magic up extra money to keep the buses running.

When I raised the issue of using funding to provide minimum service levels for rural areas in the House a few weeks ago, the then Transport Secretary, the right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh), agreed with me; I hope that the Minister will echo that agreement today. I also hope that the Minister will agree that regardless of whether new franchising powers are taken up—my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton has highlighted the difficulties—local councillors should be involved in decision making. As a councillor for many years, I know how valuable their local knowledge can be in avoiding disastrous route and timetable changes that make sense to those sitting in the bus operator’s office. The Yate and District Transport Forum in my area is a good example of local representatives working with operators, but all too often councillors find out about changes at the same time as residents, when it is too late to intervene.

I agree with the hon. Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) about the need to understand that whatever boundary one chooses for transport services, some people will want to cross it—and in the case of the 84/85, it is a significant number of people. I have had similar messages about people’s inability to get to jobs, the impact on people travelling to Katharine Lady Berkeley’s school, and so forth. It is important that the Minister provides clarity on the issue of cross-boundary services.

I will finish by briefly touching on railways. We are lucky enough to have some local lines and rail services in my area, but there is no joined-up approach to ensure that people living in villages like Hawkesbury Upton who take a bus to the railway station in Yate will get there in time to catch the next scheduled train. This lack of an ecosystem holds us back. Our services operate disjointedly, which is why people simply do not feel that they can rely on public transport to get around. In addition, we need to increase the number of rail services. I have been pushing for the reopening of stations at Charfield and Coalpit Heath as a new solution for people travelling to the growing number of jobs at Severnside, and have been pushing for the Government to guarantee funding to keep half-hourly trains running through Yate.

All in all, we need a clear and connected plan to improve our public transport network in order to fix the rot that has set in after years of Conservative cuts and neglect, and to ensure that everyone has a regular service that they can depend upon.

It is a pleasure to follow the maiden speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer), and I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing this debate.

Public transport in Leeds South West and Morley is a lifeline for many of my constituents and me. I will focus on bus travel today, as it is the No. 1 transport issue that my constituents raise with me. I have plenty of content on the railway and the trams, but I will leave that for another time.

Without bus travel, many more rural communities, such as those in Ardsley, Robin Hood, Thorpe and Lofthouse in my constituency, simply would not have the means to access essential services, as other Members have said. In Farnley and Wortley, on the other side of my constituency, we depend on a small number of bus services, which leaves us far more exposed when those services fail. Morley, despite being the largest population centre in my constituency, is not immune to all the problems we have come to associate with bus travel.

I have relied heavily on the bus services in Churwell and Morley. The 51 and the 52 got me to school 20 years ago, and I remember being frustrated with the service even then. I swore that if I was ever in a position to do something about it, I would, which is why I am very grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this debate, and to be part of this Labour Government.

We need a public transport system on which we can rely. We need to try something different, because the status quo obviously is not working. The Ardsley and Robin Hood council ward in my constituency has no town centre, and parts of it are very remote, so buses are essential for residents who do not have a car. We do not have reliable routes into Leeds city centre either, and despite all this, routes keep being cut, including very recently by a private provider, leaving residents isolated.

These routes include the 212 service that goes through East Ardsley, into Tingley and right through to Wakefield city centre. Fortunately, thanks to the work of local councillors and the West Yorkshire combined authority, we have managed to find a new provider for the route, starting in January. Obviously, this counts as a victory for local residents, but we cannot rely on such sticking-plaster solutions. We cannot scrabble around to find new private providers every time somebody cuts a bus route.

That is not to say that all private bus companies are bad—far from it. In my previous role as a councillor for Farnley and Wortley, I was very happy to work with First in Leeds on dealing with antisocial behaviour on the 42 route that went through my ward. I am so grateful for the work of First and the police to end that antisocial behaviour and restore the bus route. First has always been willing to engage with me on issues affecting its bus routes, even when it has not been able to solve the problems. However, I do not want to rely on the hope that every private provider is as willing to engage with me as First has been. We all know that private providers have to cut routes that are not profitable or subsidised, or if they go bankrupt, even if those routes are essential to vulnerable communities. That is why we need a long-term solution.

West Yorkshire is very fortunate to have Mayor Tracy Brabin, who has put public transport at the heart of her mission to change how we get around our region. I welcome the news that a franchising system will be introduced in West Yorkshire in 2027. That cannot come soon enough. It will give us direct control over the bus companies and the bus routes, so that we can finally put people before profit in our public transport system. Mayor Brabin’s work closely aligns with this Government’s strong commitment to fix the broken bus networks across our country. The new buses Bill will end the postcode lottery of bus services and deliver the biggest overhaul to our bus system in 40 years. While that move is welcomed by my constituents in Leeds South West and Morley, it is imperative that we continue to ensure that buses remain sustainable. That is why I welcome the £1 billion of investment in bus funding recently announced by the Government, including £36 million for West Yorkshire. That has helped us to extend the £2.50 price cap for the whole of 2025, and to secure routes like the 212. I respect a lot of the points made by Liberal Democrat Members, but I point out that whereas the bus fare cap was going to be abolished next year, a new cap has been introduced because of the actions of this Government. Yes, it is higher, but it is none the less a cap that will keep exponential fare rises down.

Returning to Leeds, I predict that the next two years will be vital to our bus network. As we build towards franchising in 2027, we must sustain a good level of service until that date and use every tool in our arsenal to do so. I urge my constituents to continue to contact me with problems relating to the bus network in Leeds South West and Morley. I will work with councillors of every party and with the West Yorkshire combined authority to deal with the problems that we encounter before franchising. The Minister is one of my neighbours, and has heard me set out all the arguments to do with, and problems in, my constituency, and as well as some of the solutions. Can he tell me if there is any other tool that I can use to help my constituents in the build-up to franchising in 2027, should problems arise before that date?

To conclude, we cannot understate the significance of effective public transport. Communities in Leeds South West and Morley rely on it. I can tell them that we are genuinely getting on with the job of fixing our bus networks. It is time that my constituents had access to the public transport that they deserve.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her excellent maiden speech. When I was first elected, I thought it would be difficult to get to know my 71 Liberal Democrat colleagues, but I realise that the challenge is considerably bigger for those on the Labour Benches, so I wish her well with that.

I congratulate my hon. Friend and neighbour the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing this important debate. I pay tribute to her and her colleagues on Somerset council for their work over recent years, in very difficult circumstances. The previous Government may have introduced the bus fare cap, but that did not go far enough to outweigh the decimation of public transport and bus services over decades in this country, both by central Government and Somerset county council, which cut services throughout Somerset.

For example, in 2019, shortly before the Liberal Democrats took control of Somerset, the Conservative county council proposed closing the park and ride services in Taunton. Park and ride is vital to the whole system of integrated public transport, and was an innovation of the noughties, built by a Liberal Democrat council. Although there were plans for the closure of the park and ride service, my colleagues who run the district council stepped up and saved it. They restructured fares, and the service is now once again profitable and does not require a subsidy. That shows that with a commitment to public transport and political will, such services can be made viable and can be sustained.

During these years of real challenge for local government, I give credit to Somerset council for bringing back night buses. I was delighted to meet the first night bus out of Taunton, which means we can now travel between Taunton and Wellington in my constituency until midnight every night on a weekday. I was out there with Mike driving his first night bus last year. It is a fantastic improvement.

The fare cap in Taunton meant that tickets were reduced to £1, not just £2. Shockingly, following privatisation, which was referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne), the companies closed the bus station in Taunton and sold it off. I am delighted that the council is bringing forward plans to have a transport hub once again in Taunton town centre, so that people do not have to stand shivering on pavements in the county town, getting rained on, to catch buses.

I credit the Government for the £6 million in bus service improvement plan funding, which is genuinely welcome. We would obviously have liked more and it is disappointing to see the bus cap increase to £3. As the hon. Member for East Thanet rightly pointed out, no money was pledged to support that service by the last Government. I understand the challenges, but we would have taxed big banks and big energy companies more, as my hon. Friend the Member for Guildford (Zöe Franklin) pointed out, so that we could fund some of these things to a higher level.

Before I leave bus services, I must mention that in my constituency of Taunton and Wellington, there is one part of Somerset where young people—students—get no discount at all on their bus fare. If they want to attend college as a sixth-former in my part of Somerset, they have to pay £900 per year just to get there and back. That is a prohibitively high bus fare to pay to get to college. I am working closely with councillors on Somerset council and I hope it will be possible to bring forward a discount scheme for students in our part of Somerset, like those that exist in other parts of Somerset and other parts of the country.

I will move on to the vital importance of rail in Taunton and Wellington and my part of Somerset. We have the fantastic West Somerset steam railway, which I invite all hon. Members to come and visit. It takes us from Bishops Lydeard, just outside Taunton, down to Minehead and the famous Butlin’s—I know that all Members will want to go there, and they can enjoy the steam journey over to it. A strategic outline business case has recently been submitted by West Somerset Railway to the Department for Transport to connect that railway with Taunton station so that it would have a mainline station connection, providing both a commuter service to Bishops Lydeard on the edge of Taunton and direct access to one of the best heritage railways in the country.

Perhaps more important than any of those things is the Wellington and Cullompton stations project. I recognise that there are station opening projects across the country that Members across the House will be championing as their favourite, but I must say that my understanding of the Wellington and Cullompton stations project is that, because it is a two-station project that would deliver two stations in one, it has the best benefit-cost ratio of any railway station reopening project in the country at 3.67. I said that like I understand Treasury benefit-cost ratio numbers; I only wish that were true. I am reliably informed, however, that anything above one is a really high benefit-cost ratio.

On that ground alone, the project should qualify for funding, and it would bring £3.3 million of benefit to the local economy. After all, growth is vital to the whole country, and reopening Wellington station would unlock thousands of homes around Wellington. We have a town council that wants Wellington to thrive and grow. The project to bring that railway station was very close to getting shovels in the ground. In July, the project had reached its final business case. The detailed design was ongoing—there was just a small amount of money needed to complete it—and then the Government froze the whole programme. However, I was assured by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Budget debate that the station would go ahead.

We are still waiting to hear why the most financially beneficial station reopening project in the country has not yet got the go-ahead. I am very grateful to Lord Hendy, the Minister for Rail, for the two meetings we have had. I know that the Government are supportive and sympathetic, but we need this project to get back on track—I am sorry, but it is impossible to avoid railway puns in this debate. The station is so ready to be built. We have a lot of third-party funding coming in. The access road and the car park are funded by a third-party developer. Cullompton, in the neighbouring constituency, is putting in similar third-party funding. We urgently need that project to go ahead.

We wish to secure the economic growth that Somerset needs, but we have lost £2 billion-worth of transport projects over the past few months. The A303 and the A358 have been cancelled. We desperately need a bypass for the villages of Thornfalcon and Henlade, which that A358 project would have completed. With all these projects being taken away, surely it is time that we received the funding for the new stations project at Wellington and Cullompton, with all its excellent economic growth impacts.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing this debate. She has created a safe space where all us tram, bus and train nerds can come together without fear of persecution, and we should be grateful for that.

It is great to share this debate with my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer). She has already proven herself to be a very diligent member of the Transport Committee. I congratulate her on her maiden speech today—well done.

This is a welcome debate. In the few years running up to the general election, the public discourse around transport felt like we were stuck in a narrative about cyclists versus drivers—as if they are not the same people a lot of the time—and also about low-traffic neighbourhoods. What we should have been speaking about was public transport. If we are serious about growing the economy, cutting congestion, reducing climate emissions and creating a more equal society, we should be talking about public transport generally, and buses specifically.

So far, the speeches today have focused on the things that are not working, so I want to talk about something that is working: the bus service in Edinburgh. Hopefully, we can draw some lessons from that. The service is not without its challenges, and it could be better, but it is, none the less, pretty good. People who arrive in London for the first time say that one of the things that defines London for them is the tube. It is the memory they take away and what they speak to people about. They buy T-shirts and all the rest of it. In Edinburgh, it is the buses that define us. I always say that our excellent bus service defines the city just as much as the castle does.

So what is this bus service like? People can travel on any route in the city as far as they like for £2—so, we have that £2 cap. The drivers are among the best paid drivers in the country. The workforce is heavily unionised. I think union membership is well over 90%. That is not a challenge, because the unions work in complete partnership with the managing director and the management team. It is a really good example. I have the Lothian Buses Longstone garage in my constituency. The staff there were key to Lothian Buses becoming the bus operator of the year in the UK. I invite the Minister to come along and visit the garage and meet the staff and the management team at his convenience.

What I always say is that if people get on the bus, they will see all of Edinburgh. There are of course the fantastic views. The castle is not quite in my constituency, but it can be seen from a bus in my constituency, so I will claim it. The people who use the bus service in Edinburgh are a complete cross-section of the population. Young, old, rich and less affluent people are all there together on the bus, which is fantastic. Not every city can claim that. My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) pointed out that the views from the top deck of his buses are fantastic. I want to put it on the record that the best seat in a bus is on the top deck, right at the front, above the driver. I see that there is broad agreement. It is not very controversial, which is excellent.

The bus service in Edinburgh receives no real subsidy from the local authority or the Government, apart from for older people and younger people. It actually provides a dividend to the council, which owns the service. Last year, it gave a £3 million dividend back to the city. It is a fantastic service that is cheap, has well paid staff, and pays a dividend back to its owner. What is the secret to its success? I would say that it is public ownership. I do not think that all these things are a coincidence—that the service just happens to be publicly owned. Public ownership is at the heart of it.

There is an unwritten social contract between Lothian Buses and the city. It provides a network that supports the city as a whole. It does not focus, as a private operator would, just on the routes that make it lots of money and forget about the rest of the city; it provides the network, and there is a kind of cross-subsidy within it, whereby less viable routes are supported by the more well used routes. That is really important, particularly if we want to create more equal cities using transport.

Since the election, the discussion about franchising in England has been really powerful. We already have those powers in Scotland, but it has taken time for them to be fully used, and there are funding issues. Right across England, there is real excitement about the use of franchising powers. My hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard made the case for getting the balance of those powers absolutely right so that we can move these schemes forward at pace. That is really important.

It is not just about giving local authorities franchising powers, or even the funding to deliver the services quickly. The other thing that we have to think about is ensuring that our local authorities and local leaders are able to put priority measures in place on the ground for our buses to move around the city quickly. That means bus lanes and priority measures at junctions so that we can keep people moving. In Edinburgh, there is much more that we need to do. We repeatedly ask the Scottish Government for more funding to make that happen faster. In Edinburgh, around 40% of trips inside the city are on a bus, but the percentage of the road space that is allocated just to buses is absolutely tiny, and every square metre of it is hard fought for.

Franchising alone will not solve this issue; we have to support the deployment of these schemes right across the UK. When it comes to bus lanes and priority measures at junctions, we need to think about the economy, congestion and climate, and creating more equal cities. We must not be too reactionary, but think about the benefits that a better bus service can bring to us all and engage in consultation with the community on that basis.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing this important debate. It was a pleasure to hear the maiden speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer)—wonderful stuff.

As many Members have done, I massively welcome the debate. It is a hugely important topic. Public transport is vital to not only the connectivity and economic growth of our communities, but the wellbeing of our residents. For so many people who cannot afford a car, public transport is a lifeline, allowing them to get to work, to school, to see friends and family, and to visit doctors and hospitals. Without good, reliable public transport links, our communities suffer, as so many sadly do today in my constituency of Rossendale and Darwen. It is vital that we get to grips with this issue, so I am encouraged by the work that the Government have done so far to begin the work of rebuilding our public transport links after the stark disinterest of the previous Government.

I welcome the trans-Pennine route upgrade, which will ensure that our key towns in the north are better connected, with faster and more frequent trains. With that greater connectivity and mobility, we can begin to address the constraints that have held back our northern economy for many years. Alongside that, I am pleased to see the commitment to a further £650 million for transport links outside of cities. That is much needed, with lines like those serving Darwen in my constituency crying out for improvement as they suffer constant cancellations and delays. I also hope that this will be an opportunity to address left-behind areas, such as Rossendale, where one in four of my residents commute into Manchester and yet we are the only local authority area in the north without any sort of commuter rail link. That results in 79% of journeys being by car, with all the resultant congestion and air pollution.

The City Valley rail link proposed by our borough council and county councils would be an absolute game changer. It would take half a million cars off the road and enable up to 5,000 jobs. To me, it is the definition of a no-brainer and an example of exactly the sort of connectivity issues that we need to address if we are to genuinely deliver on our growth mission.

Similarly, I was delighted to see the Government’s recent commitment to £1 billion of funding to support our local bus networks, with areas in my constituency receiving millions of pounds in support. We can now begin the vital work of strengthening our bus routes, many of which have faced years of unending cuts. In my constituency, villages such as Edgeworth, Edenfield and Weir have long felt cut off, and we need to judge the value of restoring those connections for not just short-term passenger numbers, but with consideration of all the social, wellbeing and economic benefits that come from connecting remote communities with the services, training and employment opportunities they need. I recently wrote to Lancashire county council and Blackburn with Darwen council calling on the leadership to work with me to ensure the new funding is used to address the long-standing connectivity issues, and I reiterate that call now.

In Rossendale and Darwen, the bus issues are compounded by cross-border challenges, and I am pleased to see other colleagues recognising that fundamental issue. With many key services crossing between Lancashire, West Yorkshire and Greater Manchester, the local government areas have not traditionally worked well together, and we have suffered from that lack of joined-up thinking.

We cannot discuss improving transport links without discussing improvements to local authority structures. As we are seeing in Manchester with the Bee Network, an empowered mayor and an effective combined authority can turbocharge the development of efficient, reactive, joined-up and innovative transport infrastructure that serves residents and grows the economy. Yet, in counties such as Lancashire, with an out-of-date two-tier structure and no mayor, we lack a strong voice and a coherent, joined-up transport strategy. That is why there is a pressing need, central to any efforts to tangibly improve public transport, to pursue fully fledged devolution deals for every area of the country. Only with empowered local leaders working together to quickly recognise local needs and opportunities can we have the sort of public transport system that our country and my residents in Rossendale and Darwen need.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on securing the debate and my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her maiden speech. It is an exciting speech to get off the list.

I am fortunate enough to be a Londoner, and not just any Londoner but one lucky enough to be from south of the river, which is the right side, but I had the good sense to marry a northerner.

Hear, hear!

There you go. As a Londoner who grew up with a well-integrated, well-run and efficient public transport system, I know when I raise issues around under-investment from the Government into our services, there will be colleagues who represent constituencies such as the one my husband grew up in who have to wait an hour for a bus to the nearest town and who will have little sympathy for this whinging Londoner.

However, fourteen years of failure from the previous Government have left public transport in every part of our country failing to keep pace with the needs of the people who rely on it. On their watch, cancelled train journeys rose to a record high; passengers have had to navigate 55 million different types of ticket options; and buses are driving 300 million fewer miles per year compared with 2010. For our corner of south London, the previous Government’s mismanagement led to cancelled schemes, failed projects and accessibility for passengers being ignored.

Croydon is London’s most populated borough with a projected population growth of 7.9% by 2041. In my constituency last year, East Croydon station had over 20 million journeys passing through its gates, making it the 21st most used station in Great Britain. For my constituents, using East Croydon station means dealing with congestion, antisocial behaviour and a failed footbridge project that is now known locally as “the bridge to nowhere.” The project, originally designed to improve accessibility to the station, has been beset by delays and caused endless frustration for residents. After a decade of inaction and local taxpayers’ money going into the project, Network Rail has now downgraded its plans and removed direct access to platforms, which has caused more frustration for passengers and more congestion at the station, adding insult to injury for my community.

Under the previous Government, the Croydon area remodelling scheme—a scheme designed to address congestion on the Brighton main line and upgrade Croydon’s train stations—was shelved. As that scheme is no longer going ahead, Norwood Junction station in my constituency, which is the 79th busiest station in Britain, will not get the investment that it desperately needs—no improvement to platforms, no improvement to services and no improvement to accessibility—and the addition of a new lift has been deemed too complicated by Network Rail without the scheme’s wider improvements.

I welcome the Government’s commitment to improving public transport across every part of our country, to putting passengers first, and to working with our regional mayors, not against them. Not only does that mean more regions of our country will benefit from public control of bus networks and from train services with fewer delays, but for my constituency it means a Labour Government working with a Labour mayor to finally give us the trams that we so desperately need. Yes, I am fortunate to be a Londoner who has had access to all the public transport that I could possibly need, but with a Government who invest in every region, we can do so much more.

We come to the final Back-Bench speech.

I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing the debate. I am grateful in particular to my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer), who showed the depth of her knowledge and understanding of this important matter. I have an observation about the Opposition Benches, however, Madam Deputy Speaker. It appears that you wait all day for a Tory MP to turn up to a debate on public transport—and none do.

With the exception, of course, of the shadow Minister—who is obliged to be here.

I am also grateful that the scope of the debate was widened beyond the west country, as I represent the second easternmost constituency in the country: the far eastern corner of the Isle of Thanet. Hundreds of years ago, up to Tudor times, we were cut off from the rest of the country by the River Wantsum. I fear that the legacy of the Conservative party is that they tried their best to effectively reinstate our island status by gutting our public transport and cutting us off from the rest of the country.

Fortunately, however, when it comes to trains, there is a Labour Government legacy, thanks in particular to the support and involvement of my Labour predecessor, Stephen Ladyman—a former MP for South Thanet and Transport Minister—and, of course, of the late, great John Prescott. They made enormous progress on connectivity and public transport, salvaging the high-speed rail project from which my constituency benefits so much as it links us to London and the rest of the UK, with all the economic benefits that follow. I and others, including my constituents and colleagues from across Kent, strongly advocate for the return of international services to Ashford on the high-speed rail line, because of all the economic benefits that would deliver.

It is already on the record that Kent saw a massive reduction in bus services under the previous Government, with 20% fewer bus miles than under the previous Labour Government. The Government’s announcement on bus funding is extremely welcome, especially as Kent has received the highest proportion of funding in the whole of the south-east, at £23 million. That funding, combined with the new powers for local authorities, means that Tory-run Kent county council has the ability to reverse the cut in bus miles, and I implore it to use the powers and money to do so.

There may be Members on the other side of the Chamber—it is difficult to see any—who are entirely unfamiliar with bus timetables as they all stick to their cars. However, in Broadstairs, where huge swathes of the town have no access to bus services at all, an older person would be left to walk, cycle or—much more likely—rely on lifts from friends, family or taxis. The sheer expense of relying on taxis as a primary mode of transport is enormous, unsustainable and fundamentally unfair. This has created a situation where, if someone becomes ill and is in need of NHS services, they are forced to pay for a taxi when they may not be able to afford one, or—as often happens—simply go without medical treatment.

This is particularly challenging, as a lot of NHS services in East Thanet have been moved inland. That is an all-too-common issue in coastal communities such as mine; for example, in east Kent, our orthopaedic centre is located in Canterbury. There is now no direct bus from Broadstairs or Ramsgate to Canterbury, so people with mobility issues face barriers to treatment. For some, making that extended journey means taking time off work. That has ramifications for our economy, as people who need treatment have to take time off work when they otherwise would not. That often forces people to simply go without treatment in the early stages of their illness, which can only make them sicker and place more costs on the NHS further down the line. Not only is this damaging to the sick people themselves, it stunts the economy and puts excess strain on public services.

This is not the only way in which a lack of public transport options hurts our economy; it also impacts the regeneration of our local high streets. I have many constituents who would much prefer to do their shopping in person on our local high streets, contributing to our local economy, but who now feel that they have no option but to switch to online shopping because of the lack of transport options, since they do not drive. Let me tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that when I have suggested it might be possible to have a bus connecting Ramsgate train station to Ramsgate high street, you would have thought from some people’s faces that I was asking to bend the laws of physics. We have been so used to the idea that this is simply impossible. Reliable, affordable, accessible and safe transport is a matter of social and economic justice. I applaud all the actions that the Government are taking to regenerate our high streets, which is a major issue in East Thanet that the Ramsgate empty shops campaign is seeking to work with the Government on, but if people cannot get to those high streets, I fear we will not make the progress that we rightly want.

Although we have a significant new Secretary of State with responsibility for this area, we also need to think about the legacy of previous Secretaries of State—in particular, Barbara Castle. When she was first appointed by Harold Wilson, she turned around to the Prime Minister and said, “You do know, Harold, that I can’t drive?” In the late ‘60s, this was seen as hampering her ability to be a suitable Transport Secretary, but in his wisdom, Harold Wilson said, “Yes, Barbara—exactly.” That is the point. Think of the changes that she was able to make, not only to public transport but to road safety, giving us a strong legacy that has lasted all my lifetime and, I hope, much further beyond. Good public transport is fundamental to achieving the Government’s missions, in the same way that it is fundamental to us being able to live our own lives and achieve our own ambitions: simply to get up, go to work, access the services we need, get home safely and see the people we love.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

The hon. Gentleman was not in his place at the time, and indeed neither was I, but it is worthwhile looking at the verdict of another transport nerd, a journalist from the Transport Times, back in 2015, who looked at exactly what happened when the Liberal Democrats did have an opportunity to do something about rural buses:

In county after county, cuts in rural bus service support have been severe. City deals may have been welcomed, but the idea that local government might be trusted to raise its own funding and decide on priorities has slipped further into the mists of history.

I just think it is worth reminding the House of that fact.

Order—[Interruption.] Order. Just a quick reminder that when I am on my feet, Members should not be.

That is third time the hon. Gentleman has said “you”; perhaps he will be a bit more careful in the rest of his speech.

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) on successfully applying for the debate, and I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting it. Public transport is an indispensable part of our national life, playing a vital role in our commercial, social and economic existence.

We have had an interesting debate this afternoon, with noteworthy contributions from the hon. Members for Glastonbury and Somerton, for Horsham (John Milne), for Guildford (Zöe Franklin), for Thornbury and Yate (Claire Young) and for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) as well as just now from the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) from the Liberal Democrats. From the Government Benches, the first speech was the maiden speech of the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer). It was a thoughtful speech about bus use. I am sure that she will serve her constituents diligently in her time in this place, and I wish her well. She was followed by some capable contributions from the hon. Members for Swindon North (Will Stone), for Stroud (Dr Opher), for Leeds South West and Morley (Mr Sewards), for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae), for Croydon East (Natasha Irons) and for East Thanet (Ms Billington).

I will begin by commenting on the previous Conservative Government’s time in office. It may have escaped the attention of hon. Members that between 2010 and 2024, the Conservative Government spent more than £100 billion operating and enhancing our railways. This allowed the completion of major projects including Crossrail, Thameslink and major upgrades to the east coast main line, the greater Anglia main line, the midland main line and the great western main line. We committed £36 billion to the Network North programme, which, unless the Labour Government stop it, will deliver long-term transformative transport projects that will benefit a great many people in the north of England. The programme is under review by the Government, with no guarantee that any of it will be taken forward. Obviously, we call on the Government to honour the programme in full.

We electrified over 1,200 miles of track, compared with the mere 63 miles electrified in the 13 years of the previous Labour Government. Some 75% of rail journeys are now taken on electrified tracks. We sought schemes that would reconnect communities to our railways, providing new stations for passengers to use, such as the proposed new station at Edginswell in Torbay, which would complement the delivery of a new station at Marsh Barton near Exeter, and would particularly serve the needs of Torbay hospital. I know that Torbay council is a keen advocate for that, and I hope that the Labour Government will offer the same commitment to it that we did.

To support our bus networks, we invested an unprecedented amount of over £3.5 billion in the bus sector from March 2020 to support its recovery from the pandemic. We provided £525 million of funding to deliver 4,000 new British-built electric or hydrogen buses, and we extended the “get around for £2” scheme until the end of 2024, capping hundreds of single bus fares and helping passengers reliant on buses with the cost of travel—a scheme that we pledged to maintain for the entirety of this Parliament.

I also remind the House of some facts that were curiously missing from the speeches of some hon. Members, particularly those sitting on the Government Benches. Let us turn our gaze to Wales, where Labour has been in power for a quarter of a century. The number of journeys taken on local buses has declined by almost a quarter in the past decade, with a severe impact on those in the most rural areas. The Welsh Labour Administration have spent £40 million on rolling out 20 mph speed limits to try to force motorists on to public transport that the Labour Administration themselves have made less reliable, less regular and less affordable.

Let us look at London, which has been blighted by the leadership of Sadiq Khan for the past eight and a half years. London’s mayor recently spent £6.3 million of public money on yet more virtue signalling, renaming London overground lines—something that I am sure commuters thanked him for last week when the Elizabeth line was suspended and five underground lines faced severe delays. From a man who promised to roll up his sleeves and ensure no more transport strikes, we have seen more than 130 days of strikes during his term of office.

We know what the Labour party promised the voters of this country. In its manifesto, it pledged new infrastructure, an overhaul of Britain’s railways and certainty for car manufacturers. It promised a utopian system of public transport. But the methods by which the Government have set out to achieve that have been depressingly predictable. One of the Labour Government’s first acts was to provide train drivers with inflation-busting pay rises, without securing any productivity improvements for passengers at all. That bribe to the unions has, entirely predictably, failed to prevent repeated threats of further strike action.

Then, as part of the Welsh Government’s ongoing war against rural communities, they cut £1.3 billion-worth of road improvement schemes. The Government then increased the previous Conservative Government’s £2 bus fare cap to £3, increasing fares on hundreds of bus routes across the country. [Interruption.] Totally predictably, I get heckled about it not being paid for. As hon. Members will be aware once they have been in this place for a little longer, Government schemes are funded for particular periods of time, and then the funding is reviewed. The new £3 bus far cap, costing bus users 50% more than the previous cap, is guaranteed only until the end of next year, whereas the Conservative party’s manifesto commitment was to retain the cap at £2 for the whole of the Parliament.

Finally, and perhaps most notably, the Government have introduced and passed the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Act 2024. Instead of implementing the measured and sensible reforms set out in the Williams-Shapps review, the Government have passed an Act that will neither improve passenger experience nor make significant savings. Indeed, it may prove to cost the taxpayer significantly more. The Government insist that savings to the taxpayer will amount to £150 million because of the removal of fees paid to train operating companies. Even if that is correct, it will amount to a saving of a mere 0.6% of what is currently spent on the railways, and even that tiny figure is in doubt. Analysis conducted by rail partners suggested that removing the incentive to control costs could lead to annual subsidies being at least £1 billion higher by the end of this Parliament.

From whatever angle one looks at it, it is hard to see this Act as anything other than an ideological move—one that has more to do with attempting to appease the radical elements of the Labour party, hungry for old-fashioned, hard-left policies, than the good of the passenger and the taxpayer.

I just wanted to give the hon. Gentleman the opportunity to confirm that the Tory Government were perfectly comfortable with public ownership of train operating companies as long as they belonged to Governments of other countries in Europe.

The previous Government were prepared to do what works, rather than follow ideology in spite of evidence to the contrary.

I have been the shadow Transport Secretary for 31 days and I am already on my second Secretary of State. I have known the new Secretary of State for almost two decades, since our time as councillors representing our respective London boroughs on the London Councils transport and environment committee. She is not in her place today—Secretaries of State cannot be everywhere; that is why they have junior Ministers. I am sure that the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), will ably deputise for her this afternoon.

I crossed paths with the new Secretary of State when I was Conservative leader on the London Assembly and she was appointed the deputy Mayor for Transport. Unfortunately, during her time at City Hall, London witnessed 28 strikes on Transport for London services, a 77% increase in complaints about TfL over three years, an extension of the hated ultra low emission zone, and, perhaps most concerning of all, a £4 billion overspend and three-year delay in the opening of the Elizabeth line. In defence of the right hon. Lady, though, the buck for all those failings does not stop with her—it stops with the Mayor of London. The right hon. Lady is, in fact, somebody for whom I have a high personal regard, and I look forward to welcoming her to her place.

It is fair to say that the Conservatives have doubts about the start made by this Government. However, having said all that, I emphasise that His Majesty’s Opposition will not oppose the Government just for the sake of it. I do not believe that a single Member of this House wants a public transport system that fails. As I said at the outset, public transport is an indispensable part of our national life, and a successful transport system is vital to both our present and our future. If the Government get things right, we will acknowledge that. Where they get them wrong, we will continue to hold them to account.

I call the Minister.

I thank the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) for securing this important debate on improving public transport. I believe we have reached our destination, Madam Deputy Speaker, having heard the last of the Labour maiden speeches, and of course we have saved one of the best for last. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her fantastic contribution, and very much look forward to working with her in her capacity as a member of the Transport Committee. I also thank the other hon. Members who have spoken for their insightful points. I am pleased to respond for the Government, and will do my best to address the issues that they have raised.

I start my response by emphasising that this Government are putting the needs of passengers front and centre of our transport reforms. We fully recognise the importance of public transport to our communities in rural areas, towns and cities. Delivered well, it enables people to access work and education opportunities, and to access the shops, leisure activities and essential services that they need. It can sustain and improve economic growth and productivity, unlock housing and commercial development opportunities, and connect people to each other, to businesses and markets, and to international gateways.

However, there is lots of work to be done to improve our public transport. Many people and places suffer from poor connectivity and challenging journeys, which impact both their quality of life and their access to opportunities. That is why the Government are focusing on improving performance on the railways and driving forward rail reform; improving bus services and growing bus usage across the country; transforming infrastructure, so that it works for the whole country; promoting social mobility; and tackling regional inequalities. We have been making progress. Last week, the Government set out their plan to develop an integrated national transport strategy, which will set out how all modes of transport should be designed, built and operated to better serve all the people who use them and enable them to live a fulfilling life.

To kick-start that process, on 28 November the Department launched a public call for ideas, seeking to capture people’s views and experiences of transport across England and what could be done to improve it. Delivering an effective, efficient and integrated public transport system that meets the regional and national needs of people, wherever they live and work, will play a vital role in delivering the missions of this Government.

My hon. Friend is talking about the regional and national economic growth strategies. I urge him and his friends in the Department to consider whether we need a strategy for public transport in our coastal communities. They suffer from poor connectivity, which reduces our ability to grow our economy all year round.

Having grown up in a coastal community, I understand that they have unique challenges. I will of course take that point away to the Department.

The important work to improve services has already begun. We started reforming transport on day one after the general election. Take buses, the most commonly used mode of public transport in Britain. The Government have ambitious plans to improve services and grow passenger numbers. We know how important bus services are to communities up and down the country, particularly in rural areas, where, for many, buses can be a lifeline, and the only way of getting around and accessing vital services.

Bus cuts are absolutely devastating for the woman I spoke to who could not get her weekly shop, the young man I met who had to leave for work hours early to try to get multiple buses, and the husband who could not get a bus to the care home his wife was in. Since 2008, the east midlands has suffered bus cuts of 60%—more than any other region. Does the Minister agree that regional inequality is at the heart of this debate, and that it is far past time that we saw investment in our buses?

Absolutely, of course. We need to ensure that we have effective, efficient and affordable public transport in every single corner of the country.

In September, we took the first step in empowering local leaders by introducing a statutory instrument to expand franchising powers beyond mayoral combined authorities to all local transport authorities. We also consulted on new guidance for local leaders looking to bring services into public control. This new, simplified guidance will help to break down barriers to local control of bus services, speeding up the process and bringing down costs. Of course, the buses Bill will empower local leaders by giving them the tools that they need to address local public transport challenges, including by making further changes to simplify bus franchising and by creating locally owned bus companies. We have already seen examples of the improvements that local leaders can make to services. To take my favourite example, the Bee Network in Manchester is on course to complete the re-regulation of buses in its new network in the new year. It will become the first city region outside London to put buses fully back under public control after four decades of deregulation. This new bus network franchise has seen increases in both patronage and punctuality.

We are backing up those reforms with new funding for buses next year. In the Budget, the Government confirmed that there would be more than £1 billion to help local transport authorities and operators to deliver high-quality, reliable public services. That includes £150 million to deliver the new £3 fare cap, which will ensure that passengers have access to affordable fares and better opportunities; £712 million for local authorities to continue to support and improve their bus services; and £243 million for the bus service operators grant. That is given directly to bus operators to support and protect existing services. That funding is the next stop on our journey towards improving services. Every region in England will benefit. The money will make a real difference for people across the country, and could be used to fund more frequent services, so that people can get to more places more often; safer, better and more accessible bus stops; new electric buses; or better real-time information, so that passengers can be confident that their bus will turn up.

Of course, it is not just bus passengers who want their services to run on time. On railways, we have been clear that services have been failing passengers. Performance is inconsistent across the country, and in many areas, the service is not where it needs to be. Improving performance is a key priority, and we will continue to challenge the worst-performing train operating companies and their Network Rail counterparts to address poor performance and raise standards. Just as with buses, we have been making progress. We have resolved long-running industrial disputes over pay, ending the massive disruption and financial impact of national strikes and resetting industrial relations. That paves the way for more collaboration with the trade unions, and the delivery of a railway that works for everyone.

As well as continuing to fund the operation of the railway, we are committed to investing to deliver improvements for passengers. We are simplifying and modernising the rail fare and ticketing system, and have already made great progress. We have driven forward pay-as-you-go in the south-east through the delivery of Project Oval phase 1A. In 2025 we will see further phases of Project Oval go live, which will include Stansted. We have also have completed a detailed design of pay-as-you-go schemes in the west midlands, and Greater Manchester plans to launch digital pay-as-you-go trials in 2025. We continue to progress long-distance fare reforms, with trials on London North Eastern Railway.

Looking forward, we have committed ourselves to undertaking a fare review, which is to be completed over 2025, and we will also continue to invest in infrastructure. Just last week, the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Act 2024, which received Royal Assent on 28 November, enabled us to bring passenger service operations back into public ownership, starting with South Western Railway’s services in May 2025, c2c’s in July and Greater Anglia’s in the autumn.

You mentioned infrastructure—

The Minister! The Minister!

What did I say? [Hon. Members: “You said ‘you’”.] Did I? Sorry! The Minister mentioned infrastructure. We have seen significant delays on the line from the west country in the last few weeks owing to flooding. In particular, trains are having to divert between Bristol Parkway and Swindon and having to go via Bath and Chippenham. Local residents fear that the work to try to stop flooding on that length of the line, which is very prone to flooding, may have led to their houses being flooded. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the infrastructure issues on that section of the railway?

I will make sure that I pass that request to the Minister with responsibility for rail, who I am sure will be pleased to meet you.

Within this Parliament, all passenger service operations will have completed the transition to being managed by Great British Railways, which we will establish as the directing mind for the railway by introducing further legislation during this Session. Great British Railways will ensure the highest standards of customer service and operational performance, and will simplify the railways, bringing together the delivery of passenger services, infrastructure, and responsibility for planning and the use of the network. It will bring an end to years of fragmentation and waste. However, we are not waiting for this further legislation. We have already brought key parts of the rail industry together as Shadow Great British Railways, which is working to improve services, unblock barriers to delivery, and move the rail network towards greater financial sustainability.

Although we must and will improve the railways in the short term, we must also think about the long term. We are committed to setting out a long-term rail strategy that will provide a framework for the industry over the next 30 years. We will work with stakeholders to ensure that the strategy maximises the benefits of rail for everyone, because improvements have to benefit everyone who uses our public transport system. This Government want everyone to have access to public transport, and are committed to supporting improvements to services so that they are more inclusive and enable everyone to travel safely, confidently and with dignity.

I am particularly struck by what my hon. Friend is saying about making sure that everybody has access to what they need. He will have heard what I said about accessing healthcare via public transport. As we are talking about integrating our transport strategy into other strategies that might achieve our overall Government missions, will due regard be given to where existing health services are provided when making decisions about where we will put infrastructure?

You make a powerful point. I would encourage you to make a submission to the integrated transport—

Order. The Minister has done it three times now. If I can tell off new Members, I can certainly tell off long-standing ones. No “yous” in the Chamber!

I am quite flattered to be called a long-standing Member, Madam Deputy Speaker.

Improvements to the transport system have to benefit everyone. As I said, this Government want everyone to have access to public transport. The first phase of the accessible information regulations came into force earlier this year. They require buses and coaches that have been used on local services since October 2019 to provide audible and visual route and destination announcements, helping everyone to travel with confidence. We have committed to working with disabled people to develop and publish an accessibility road map, which will set out the steps being taken to improve rail accessibility. Through the Access for All programme, we are continuing to work to provide step-free access routes to railway stations.

All these efforts are impossible without local partners. This Government recognise that decisions on how and where to intervene to improve local transport should be made locally. That is why we worked to strengthen the relationship between central Government and local leaders in the first few days after coming to power, working in partnership with them to develop and deliver their priorities.

On funding, we are committed to simplifying the local transport funding landscape for local authorities, ending inefficient competitions and allowing places more flexibility to decide the transport projects that will most benefit their area. The city region sustainable transport settlements provide the largest city regions with long-term funding, and empower mayors to deliver infrastructure projects that will have transformative effects on transport and be based on their local priorities, improving the lives of people in their great city regions. Looking ahead, we are committed to giving local government multi-year funding settlements at the forthcoming spending review to help it make long-term plans for transport in different areas, backed up by deepening regional devolution.

High-quality transport infrastructure supports growth and opportunity, and bringing decisions about transport closer to people is key to improving the transport networks on which we rely every day. We will therefore empower local leaders to take greater oversight of their local transport networks. We are committed to simplifying the local transport funding landscape for local authorities, ending the inefficient competitions to which I referred. We are using data and research to continue to build our understanding of what people need from the transport network, and we are continuing to invest in it. We are taking a long-term view to get the right mix of existing projects and new schemes in order to deliver a public transport system that is fit for the 21st century.

Reliable, affordable, safe and accessible transport that works for passengers and efficiently moves goods around the country is key to economic growth and people accessing opportunities. People travel for a purpose, whether it is to get to work or education, to access services such as hospitals and shops, or to meet family and friends.

We are working hard to ensure that our public transport networks and services are more accessible, available and affordable to those who rely on them the most, wherever they live and work. We are continuing to build stronger relationships with our devolved partners to ensure that public transport is serving the needs of local communities.

The hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton raised a number of specific transport issues in her constituency. I will, of course, be happy to address those very specific issues outside the Chamber, but I now turn to the core themes, starting with the integrated national transport strategy.

The Government’s manifesto committed to developing a long-term strategy for transport, and it said

“transport services have remained fragmented and inefficient with companies and sectors failing to speak to and plan with each other.”

This Government want to focus on how transport can be designed, built and operated to better serve all people who use it, and to enable them to live fulfilling lives.

Rural bus services have been mentioned quite a lot in this debate. By giving local transport authorities more power to deliver the model that works best for their area, and by giving them flexibility on funding, they can deliver comprehensive bus networks, including the use of demand-responsive transport where appropriate and desired, to make bus services work for all communities, including in rural areas.

The buses Bill will put decision making in the hands of local leaders across England, including those in rural areas, to determine how best to design their local bus services so that they have control over routes and schedules. Bus franchising can be for all areas of the country, and it is not reserved for places like Manchester, which has done it so effectively. We are looking at various franchising models, which we hope to expand on during the Bill’s passage.

Members have raised the need for real-time information, and I totally agree. Such information is important in empowering people to make effective decisions and in raising people’s confidence, particularly women and girls, to go out and use public transport, as they know whether the bus will turn up on time or whether they should wait a little longer before going out for the bus. These little things can make a lot of difference to passenger confidence.

As part of the Budget, we confirmed more than £1 billion for the 2025-26 financial year to support bus services in England, outside London, and to keep fares affordable. The current £2 cap on single bus fares had been due to expire at the end of this year, but it will now be replaced by a £3 cap to help millions of people access better opportunities and to promote greater bus use.

I thank the hon. Members for Horsham (John Milne) and for Guildford (Zöe Franklin) and my hon. Friend the Member for Swindon North (Will Stone) for their contributions. On accessibility, the Rail Minister has committed to working with the disabled community to develop and publish an accessibility road map ahead of GBR being set up.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher). As I mentioned a moment ago, franchising can meet the needs of communities of all shapes and sizes across the country, and I hope we can demonstrate that during the passage of the buses Bill. I also thank the hon. Member for Thornbury and Yate (Claire Young) and my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mr Sewards), who share many of the same transport challenges. I put on record my thanks and admiration for the queen of buses, the West Yorkshire Mayor, for everything she is doing to promote buses in West Yorkshire, including taking them back into public control.

Finally, I thank the hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos). I am sure the Rail Minister will have heard his comments on his station projects.

The Minister is trying to comprehensively address all the comments in the debate. I realise he cannot comment on individual projects, but will he undertake to inform the Secretary of State of the need to release funding for the most important restoring your railway projects?

I am sure the Secretary of State will have heard that message, as will the Rail Minister regarding the hon. Gentleman’s individual project.

I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur), for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) and for Croydon East (Natasha Irons). I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon East will welcome the £485 million that was delivered to Transport for London in the last Budget; as a northern MP, I can say that without any hesitation. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington) for her passionate speech, which was delivered by a passionate advocate for public transport.

Turning to the comments made by the shadow Secretary of State, I will take no lectures from the Opposition on public transport. Looking at the Opposition Benches, all I will say is this: a picture paints a thousand words.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her maiden speech. I wish I could share her frustration about three buses turning up at once; in Somerset, we would be delighted should one turn up at any time.

I thank all the hon. Members across the House—well, parts of the House—for their attendance today. The wide interests shared in their contributions highlight the importance of the debate. As I said in my opening remarks, the poor quality of rural transport, particularly bus services, has been evidenced by all the hon. Members from rural areas who have spoken.

The environmental and economic importance of public transport cannot be overstated. It is crucial to helping the Government hit two of their five missions, so they should grasp the opportunity to fix public transport in rural areas. I welcome the Minister’s comments, but residents who travel from the south-west must know that construction at Old Oak Common will impact them. We need to give them assurances that the impact of the work will be mitigated as far as possible. I would welcome a conversation with the Rail Minister on behalf of my constituents.

We also desperately need more information about the renationalisation of South Western Railway. Many of my constituents rely on that operator and they must have the confidence that the service will improve.

My constituents in Somerton and Langport desperately want a train station to connect them to the railway, and they need information about that as soon as possible. The lack of correspondence across successive Governments is very disappointing. If a train station is still some time away, although I hope it is not, then the need to improve bus services and integrate them with the railway is vital. Liberal Democrat and Labour Members recognised that point, and I hope we can make progress on it. I thank the Minister for recognising it as well.

I look forward to seeing the models for franchising, as the Minister set out. We need funding to improve rural bus services and a real focus to provide rural residents with a working public transport system. I eagerly await finding out how the Government will approach that over the coming weeks and months. Will the Minister set out guidance for social and economic outcomes? I believe the Government’s better buses Bill will provide the perfect opportunity to do that.

The hon. Lady is summing up the debate well and I know that time is tight. She will know that the Transport Committee has just launched an inquiry into rural bus services that will focus on the social and economic aspect of those services, among other things. Will she encourage people in her network to respond to the call for evidence?

Absolutely I will, and I encourage all hon. Members to do exactly that.

To summarise, I thank the Minister for his assurances. He knows that the Liberal Democrats will hold him to account.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the matter of improving public transport.