PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Small Towns: Transport Links - 3 June 2026 (Commons/Westminster Hall)
Debate Detail
That this House has considered transport links for small towns.
It is a pleasure, Sir Roger, to serve under your firm chairship. I thank the Minister for attending today. He has been a keen advocate for small towns, and I am sure a lot of the issues we will talk about today will be familiar to him.
Connectivity is not a luxury; it is a necessity. It underpins economic growth, but it also shapes something far more immediate and personal: our health, our independence and a sense of belonging. For our small towns, the quality of connection sends a powerful message about whether we are seen, valued and included in our national story. It would be a mistake to think of this as a question simply of how towns connect to cities. It is about the everyday journeys that define people’s lives: how they get from their front door to work, to school, to the shop or to the doctor.
We must begin with empowering people to actively travel by walking, wheeling or cycling to work or school or to see friends. True connectivity is not just about how we get from one place to another; it is about having real choice in how we do so. At present, too many people in our small towns feel that they have to rely on a car even for the shortest journeys. For many, it is not that they are unwilling to walk or ride; it is just that they do not feel they have the option. What they need is not persuasion but safe, accessible, well-designed environments to make active travel the obvious and practical choice. That means getting the basics right, from ensuring our pavements are usable for everyone—including those with disabilities or parents with prams—to safer crossings, better lighting and dedicated routes that give people the confidence to walk, wheel or cycle as part of their daily routine.
Within this context I would like to focus on travel to school. We can all recognise the benefits of more children walking or riding to school on health and on reducing congestion. It is generally a more relaxed start to the day. Parents know that, but far too many concerns over safety are a key barrier: speeding heavy goods vehicles, narrow and blocked pavements and a lack of safe crossings present challenges. It is no surprise that in small towns and villages, only 30% of children walk or ride to school. For cities the figures are much higher at around 60%, showing how much room there is for improvement, and that inequity can be addressed. Living Streets, working with forward-thinking councils like Blackburn with Darwen, has shown a way forward: local authorities working proactively with schools to deliver evidence-based travel initiatives and infrastructure.
But this sort of best practice is still far too patchy. Last year in Lancashire, my 11-year-old constituent William Cartwright collected 1,400 signatures for a petition asking the county council to simply install a safe crossing, to allow him and his fellow pupils to walk safely to school. Despite this clear public support, Lancashire county council said no, citing the tired old excuse that not enough people have been killed or injured—yet—on the road in question. The idea of working with the school proactively to enable safe travel seemed entirely alien to it. We need to do better. I call on the county council to think again and work with me on this, and I call on the Government to clearly lay down best practice in their road safety and active travel guidance.
More broadly, active travel must be seen as integral to the wider transport system, not separate from it. Walking and cycling are what connect people to buses, trains and trams. When these modes work together, we create a system that is not only more efficient but healthier, more affordable and more sustainable for the communities it serves.
I turn to buses, which are a crucial part of the transport mix that we have to get right. They are vital for the more vulnerable in our society—the elderly, the young and the disabled—yet 56% of county and unitary council areas still lack adequate provision. For small towns, a lack of buses limits access to essential services.
The lack of buses limits access to essential services such as healthcare, education and employment, exacerbates social isolation and forces people into higher-cost alternatives.
The lack of buses disproportionately impacts people in small towns and villages, so it is crucial that we get this right. Fundamentally, we need to recognise that buses are a public service, not a commercial enterprise. I am pleased and proud that this Government have fully recognised that right from the start. The retention of the £3 bus fare cap and investment of £1 billion a year to support bus routes will benefit thousands of my constituents.
Looking forward, the Government’s commitment to empower local communities to take control of bus services, along with the requirement on local government to identify “socially necessary” routes, has the potential to deliver the joined-up services we need. But our reforms will only succeed if we address the practical barriers to delivering the day-to-day changes that our communities require. To give one example, in Edgworth near Darwen in my constituency, residents rely on healthcare, shops and schools in Bolton, yet over the years, bus services have been occasional and short-lived. This transport isolation is the single biggest issue raised with me by the community. When I spoke to a group of teenagers, they were clear that the best thing we could do to improve things for them would be simply to offer a bus into Bolton. Older residents say the same, so why have we not got one?
While there is a need for a subsidy, the fundamental issue seems to be that Bolton is in Greater Manchester, so the route would cross local authority boundaries. For years, no one seemed to want to take responsibility. Greater Manchester said it could not fund the route because residents of Blackburn with Darwen would be the beneficiaries, and Blackburn was unwilling to fund it because residents were going to spend their money in Greater Manchester—not exactly a joined-up system.
Things are changing, and I am pleased to say that a study commissioned by Blackburn with Darwen has finally recommended that the council get behind a new bus route. That is exactly the sort of thing that Government bus funding is supposed to enable; we just need to make it actually happen.
This cross-border issue is one that we face across Rossendale and Darwen. Its impact is compounded by the fact that so many of our crucial services are in other local authority areas, and that is true of so many other small towns. Solving this is a crucial test for the implementation of bus improvement policy, and I argue that it should be incumbent on existing mayoral authorities to work proactively with neighbouring councils to eliminate cross-border transport inequity.
Thirdly, I want to touch briefly on roads. Roads are an obvious and crucial connector. Many small towns are built around one or two key roads. Unlike in a city, where there are lots of options, when these roads are closed or disrupted by street works, the entire community feels it. For instance, in both Rossendale and Darwen, we have one main road that runs through the whole valley. When it is blocked or the traffic is severe, it is not just an inconvenience; it has serious impacts on local businesses and residents. Indeed, several well-established local businesses have told me they are considering leaving the area unless action is taken on congestion.
Unco-ordinated, overrunning roadworks are a constraint on small towns and must be treated as such. Councils need the powers to properly police contractors and incentivise quick completion. I welcome the Government’s support for continuing the roll-out of lane rental schemes, which are proven to reduce congestion on the busiest roads. I will call on all local authorities, including Lancashire county council, to work with the Government and act with urgency to tackle this blight on our towns.
Finally, we come to rail. For so many small towns this is a crucial connection, yet services are often patchy and unreliable—if they exist at all. There are still far too many towns without an accessible rail link, leaving them on the edges of opportunity, not through a lack of ambition but through a lack of connection.
On the lack of connection, Rossendale remains the only local authority in the north without a direct rail link, despite thousands of residents commuting into Manchester every week—it is only 15 miles away. The old railway line still exists; all we need to do is reinstate it as a commuter line. Rossendale borough council has fully explored the costs and benefits in its City Valley link proposal. It is not a speculative idea, but a credible, carefully developed proposal with a strong business case behind it.
Rossendale has put forward its plan. Surveys show that the public overwhelming support it, because communities in Rossendale understand exactly what a rail link would mean. By opening up the valley, we could become a much more attractive destination for businesses looking to relocate to lower-cost areas. Existing businesses would have access to bigger skills pools and reduced supply costs. Jobs in central Manchester would become more viable, and footfall in our town centres would significantly grow. This is pretty much the definition of a growth no-brainer, yet like so many small-town infrastructure projects, the proposal has got nowhere. It has been consistently overlooked or rejected through a narrow use of old Green Book guidance, whereas just down the road we see multibillion-pound projects, which we cannot even connect to, being given the green light.
To add insult to injury, Lancashire combined county authority did not even include the City Valley link in its recent transport infrastructure plan, despite Rossendale being clearly identified as suffering from transport isolation. I hope that is just a simple mistake, and I call on the combined authority to ensure that this vital link is included in the final version of the plan. I hope the Minister will support me in this endeavour.
Similarly, I have been calling for the restoration of Lower Darwen station, which I am pleased to say is now in the implementation plan. This represents an opportunity to finally reconnect a community that has been cut off for too long. By providing easy access to the Manchester-Clitheroe line, the station would unlock new jobs and opportunities in the whole community. In both Rossendale and Lower Darwen, it is not just about a railway line; it is about finally giving our towns the infrastructure they need to thrive.
Outside the south-east, our small towns have felt left behind for far too long, and persistent poor connectivity is a stark indicator of this. We need to be honest: this has not just been an accident of fate; historical Government policy and practice have been key factors. The Green Book has been consistently misused, with assessors simply relying on benefit-cost ratios, which inevitably favour better-off urban areas. Alongside that, our economic policy has defaulted to the city-focused, trickle-down approach.
Although the 2024 Green Book review and Government initiatives have put us in a potentially better place, issues do remain. We need a clear focus from Ministers to ensure that civil servants are genuinely implementing the Green Book recommendations and that local authorities—particularly non-mayoral areas—have the capacity and capability to develop robust business cases. We also need to move beyond the city-centric economic model and towards one that values all places. In that regard, we have a long way to go. If we look at the list of investment programmes, infrastructure projects and policy pathfinders—
The investment projects that the Government have brought forward—infrastructure projects and policy pathfinders—overwhelmingly focus on mayoral strategic authorities, which are big-city-focused. That needs to change. We need to recognise the moral, economic, social and political imperative of joined-up policy that enables all our towns to reach their potential, with connectivity at the heart of that ambition. That means not just one solution but a joined-up approach, with better rail links, bus services, roads that can be relied upon and safe, reliable access routes for cycling and walking.
It is not an either/or. As my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) said, we should not see the big transport infrastructure projects in the pipeline in isolation or just as city connectors; rather, they are enablers of connectivity and growth along the whole route. In the north, we have Northern Powerhouse Rail, which is a huge opportunity for our region, but if small town connectivity is not addressed, places such as Rossendale and Darwen will feel little benefit and the opportunity will be missed. With that in mind, I ask the Minister to meet me and colleagues to discuss how to make big infrastructure projects such as Northern Powerhouse Rail a catalyst in delivering connectivity and opportunity to the small towns and communities that need it most.
Market Rasen may be a small town, but it connects up to Grimsby, which has been represented for virtually the whole of the last half-century by Labour MPs. I do not complain about that. It is a levelling-up town. It is one of the largest towns in England not to have a through train to London. We are spending £100 billion on HS2, but we are not prepared to spend less than £1 million on getting a train from Grimsby to London. That is an absurd way of running the country.
Every time we try to talk about this issue, we are fobbed off with excuses. We are told that the platform at Market Rasen is too short. Well, we have all been on trains when we are told to go to the front three or four carriages, and we can get off perfectly safely. We are told that the platform is not high enough. Well, there is matting that can be put down. We are told that there is no bridge. There has not been a bridge at Market Rasen for 100 years.
The point I am making is that, instead of having a can-do attitude in this country, we are ruled by faceless bureaucrats in train companies, nationalised industries, agencies and Ministries. The Minister is sitting there; why does he not intervene? My hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) and I have been to see him and the Rail Minister, who promised help—but still no train.
At the other end of my constituency, we have Gainsborough Central station, which connects up to Cleethorpes. People might think that it would be lovely to take the train on a beautiful summer’s day instead of driving all that way. It takes two hours to get there, and there is one train a day, so when the person gets to Cleethorpes after a two-hour journey, they have only an hour and a half there before they have to come back. There is barely time to dip their toes at the beautiful beaches of Cleethorpes—one of the finest resorts in England, which people want to go to. If people want to go in the other direction, to Sheffield or Meadowhall, they can get there from Gainsborough Central station, but there is no train back, unless they want to take a donkey.
Why is there so little concern for small towns? Why are we wasting so many resources on these prestige projects dreamed up by the likes of Ceaușescu? It is a waste of money. Let us put the money and resources where it matters, in rural communities and small towns. That is why this debate, for which I congratulate the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen, is so important.
As the MP for the largest constituency in England, I spend a lot of time speaking about local transport, whether that is rail, road, walking or cycling. Over the recess, I was lucky to cycle a part of the proposed Haydon Bridge to Hexham cycle way. I look forward to working with the community group that is trying to get funding for that.
I will spend a lot of my time focusing on a particular case: the ongoing campaign to bring rail back to the village of Gilsland, which sits half in my constituency and half in that of my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns). Gilsland sits on the Northumberland-Cumbria border, at the heart of the Hadrian’s wall world heritage site. The village is a central point for visitors to the incredible features of historical interest in the border country. There was a train station at Gilsland from 1836 to 1967, when it closed because of the Beeching report, along with thousands of other stations across the country.
There has been passionate community campaigning, spanning decades, by the Campaign to Open Gilsland Station and the Tyne Valley Community Rail Partnership, which are dedicated to the cause of reconnecting local people to their rail network. They have been challenging outdated assumptions, securing reports showing clear evidence of the credible economic and social case for reopening the station, and submitting multiple bids to multiple Government pots of money. Almost 60 years after closure, there is still no operating station, despite the fact that locals have to see trains passing the station on the Newcastle-Carlisle line every day. That is a living example of a rural community being left behind.
I am passionate about getting the station reopened. It would be fantastic not just for the economy of Gilsland, but for the economy of the whole of Northumberland. It would add to the county’s already magnificent tourism offer and would make it easier for people to come into my region and spend their money. Visit Northumberland, the tourism body, spends most of its time—as does the Conservative-run county council—promoting the coastal regions of the county, rather than promoting west Northumberland.
I want to comment briefly on a subject that my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen touched on: road safety. There can be no good connectivity without road safety. On a summer tour last year, I held 80 surgeries in four weeks across my constituency; I will do it again this year. The No. 1 concern that comes up in almost every village is “Can we get a speed limit? Can we get a speed camera? Can we do something about road crossings?” It particularly affects those small villages where people have to cross the road to get the village hall or the shop. These are often communities where there is no available road crossing.
I would like to see the Government doing far more to push local authorities to address what are often ticking time bombs. Those cases are often acted on only after there has been a tragedy. We need far more proactive action from local authorities.
Transport options for people across Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe are dreadful. Whether for getting to work, accessing healthcare, visiting family, attending college or simply participating in community life, transport options are often the difference between a thriving town and one that has been left behind. In one of the largest and most rural constituencies in Wales and the whole UK, too many residents feel that transport decisions are being made “to” them rather than with them.
One of the biggest concerns recently raised with me is the changes made to the T4 bus service. What was once the only direct connection between mid-Wales and our capital, Cardiff, now requires passengers to change in Merthyr Tydfil. For many residents, particularly older or disabled passengers and those carrying heavy luggage, that additional change is not a minor inconvenience. It makes journeys longer, more complicated and less attractive. That is made worse by the fact that the T4 and X4 timetables are poorly integrated, leaving passengers facing lengthy waits and unreliable connections from Merthyr.
Cardiff is the major destination on the route. It is where people travel for specialist NHS appointments, university and college education, employment opportunities, access to national institutions or simply a day shopping. For many residents across Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, a reliable public transport connection to the Welsh capital is essential. Those changes to the T4 service may look minor on a map but, for those who rely on public transport, it has made travelling to Cardiff significantly more difficult. Rural communities should not be expected to accept a worse service while being told by their Government that it represents progress. The direct service to Cardiff must be restored, because it is leaving many elderly pensioners in my constituency stuck at home.
The Swansea valley has similar challenges with bus services. People in Ystradgynlais, Ystalyfera and Pontardawe have repeatedly reported buses on the T6 and X6 routes running late, being cancelled at short notice or not turning up at all in recent months. That is why rural bus connections are so important. Again, I thank the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen for giving us the opportunity to put these points on the record.
We also have a long-standing problem with accessibility at Sandbach station, which is frankly disastrous. It is a huge problem for anyone who cannot manage the extremely steep stairs. The service runs to a major city and an airport, so by definition people have luggage, buggies and so forth.
What I really want to talk about is buses. There are so many problems with buses in my area. The Government’s transport improvement funds for buses have helped, and so have section 106 contributions from developers. I would like to praise my local council, which has been able to put on some additional services with those two sources of funds.
None the less, there are so many problems. When I spoke to young people at Shipton Explorer Scouts, they spoke at length about the difficulty of buses that are just too full: there are too many students trying to get on them, so the buses stop letting them on. I have GCSE students who are terrified. One called my office recently because his bus simply had not shown up. We eventually got to the bottom of it: the app was not working, the bus had been diverted because of roadworks, and no one had informed the school or the pupils. These buses only run once an hour. When children and young people need to get to life-changing exams, the consequences of unreliability—buses that do not show up or that do not stop because they are too full—are potentially devastating.
Local employers I speak to in places like care homes and nurseries, some of which are not in the centre of town, have huge problems recruiting because people simply cannot get to them without car access. In rural and semi-rural areas, this is a huge, long-standing economic problem. It makes it difficult for parents to work, because they cannot reliably get their children to school on public transport. The economic and other impacts for people are absolutely massive. My constituents also talk to me about a sense of rural isolation—which I would go into further, but I have run out of time.
It will come as no surprise to the Minister that I am going to talk about Aldridge train station. Mine is one a handful of constituencies that has a railway line but still does not have a train station. If we are serious about improving connectivity and the life chances of young people, we could improve so many things by simply getting on and delivering the train station.
I think the Minister knows the history, but I will gently remind him of it. Perhaps he can pass this on to the Rail Minister in the other place, because I have suggestions on how we can fix things. To take a step back, we have a track in place. The council has secured the land for the car park and some exploratory work is ongoing, which I am grateful for. A business case was approved to reopen the line from Aldridge to Walsall, which would give us the connections we need into Walsall and beyond. I am not even pushing for the completion of the rail hub; I just want the link into Walsall, please. Andy Street made the business case and everything was going swimmingly until, sadly, we lost the mayoral election. I appreciate that that is democracy, but it is sad that Mayor Parker, the new Labour mayor, diverted the funds, meaning there was no money to deliver the project for Aldridge.
Alongside that, we are waiting for a decision from the Wrexham, Shropshire and Midlands Railway about an open access line that would enable a direct train service from Wrexham to Euston, coming through Aldridge. I back that service, but it must stop at Aldridge. It is incomprehensible that that line could be approved without a stop at Aldridge—I will not be the only one protesting if that is the case.
Will the Minister urge the Rail Minister to work with me to deliver a railway station for Aldridge? It is not just about Aldridge; some people describe it as a village but it is actually a big village and a big community, and a station would serve a big area. I would like help in getting answers out of the mayor; the last time I wrote to him, he failed to respond. My ask to the Minister is simple: please work with me and let us get the train station delivered for the residents of Aldridge, as was promised a few years ago.
When it comes to transport links for small towns, few can boast the train to Hogsmeade station, where the Hogwarts Express ended its journey north from platform nine and three quarters. The real-life Goathland station, which starred in the Harry Potter films, is just one of the beautiful stations on the Esk Valley railway line from Whitby to Middlesbrough, which follows the route of the River Esk for much of its 24 miles, passing through verdant farmland, rolling moors and picturesque villages. Sadly, the scenery is far more beautiful than the train service. The villain of the piece is not Lord Voldemort, but Dr Beeching, the Minister who cut the Whitby to Scarborough line back in 1965, condemning Whitby to reliance on cars and buses.
That Whitby lost its train link to its coastal neighbour is bad enough, but to add insult to injury, the current service that connects Whitby to the nearest big town, Middlesbrough, is one of the worst in the country. That is not the fault of the not-for-profit Esk Valley Railway Development Company, a dedicated community rail partnership that runs the line with passion and flair. Indeed, the company fought hard to get a station opened at James Cook hospital in 2014. The whole point of that stop was to provide access to the hospital; instead, Whitby residents find themselves isolated from essential healthcare. There are only six trains a day, with four-hour gaps in the morning and afternoon. That makes it impossible to plan for a hospital appointment. Constituents have told me they have to stay over at Middlesbrough because they cannot get to and from the hospital in a day. It is not only hospital patients who are frustrated by the poor service, but constituents who want to work in Middlesbrough, where there are many more employment opportunities than in Whitby.
The lack of ambition and investment in this essential transport link for Whitby is laid bare when it is compared with another seaside town, in the south. Newquay in Cornwall is not unlike Whitby in size, and it is also at the end of a branch line. Office of Rail and Road figures show that in 2023-24 the Newquay line carried 146,000 passengers, which was down 2%, while the Whitby line carried 257,000, which was up 6.3%. Until recently, both lines suffered from poor train services, but Newquay now has 15 trains on weekdays, 14 on Saturdays and eight on Sundays, thanks to a £57 million investment. According to a press release, there is also a through-train to London, while on the same day Whitby has just six trains.
I would love to hear from the Minister how Great British Railways can improve transport links to small towns like Whitby, and open up a world of possibilities for its residents.
I represent the market towns of Frome, Midsomer Norton and Radstock, as well as many larger villages, such as Evercreech and Peasedown St John. On 18 May, five services failed to run on the 172 and 171 bus routes that serve Midsomer Norton, which meant that for nearly three hours during the morning rush hour, between half-past 6 and half-past 9, there was no bus service at all. I have had emails from constituents for whom it meant missing a shift at work or missing medical appointments. I raise this incident not to criticise one operator on one morning—in fairness, the operator has apologised—but because it illustrates something systemic, which is that when the margin for error is zero because there is no back-up or redundancy, any failure becomes a crisis. That is the reality for communities whose transport links are threadbare to begin with.
I have constituents who cannot take a job in the next town because the bus does not run early enough to get them there. I represent many young people, including those in my own family, who cannot get a job or see friends because there is no suitable public transport. My constituency is a radiotherapy desert—without a car, there is not one place in my constituency where you could reach radiotherapy treatment within the recommended timescales. Such stories represent the lived experience of a significant portion of my constituency.
The Government’s briefing on the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill speaks of bringing power closer to communities, but devolution delivered through metro mayors in large urban centres offers little comfort to places like Frome and East Somerset. We have seen millions for buses being poured into the West of England combined authority, which is welcome, only to find that the focus is on getting people in and out of Bristol even more effectively than they currently are. Devolution that does not reach rural communities is not devolution: it is a redistribution of power to a slightly different tier of city.
We need a funding model for bus services that does not treat rural routes as commercially unviable afterthoughts. We need the franchising powers in the Bus Services Act 2025 to be accessible to county councils, not just combined authorities with mayoral structures. We need a duty on operators to provide genuine contingency when services fail and guarantees that, when new housing developments are approved, transport infrastructure is not an optional extra or included in section 106 agreement only to be quietly watered down later.
I have spoken in this place before about the link between transport and safety, and in particular about women in my constituency who have told me that they gave up running, cycling or going out after dark in the winter because waiting at isolated bus stops on unlit country lanes did not feel safe. Transport is not just a technical issue, but a question of who gets to participate fully in public life and who is excluded from it, which is why I will continue to campaign for the Government to include mention of women and girls’ safety in the national planning policy framework.
I welcome much of the Government’s rhetoric about the importance of improved public transport and the fact they are making spending commitments to support it, but I urge them not to forget places like Frome and East Somerset, where the potential for economic growth is huge if only people could get where they need to go.
Too many towns, such as Mansfield in my constituency, have been left behind when it comes to transport infrastructure. We have seen bus routes cut back, unreliable services become the norm and communities increasingly isolated, and it has real economic and social consequences. I believe the action already taken by the Labour Government is beginning to turn things around. The Government’s £3 billion investment in buses, alongside the Bus Services Act, represents the biggest reform for buses in a generation.
Although buses are vital, rail connectivity is equally important to the future prosperity of towns like Mansfield. My constituency is rightly proud of its railway heritage—we have already heard about the importance of strong local rail services—and I want to speak in support of two rail schemes. First, the Robin Hood line extension running from Shirebrook to Ollerton would reopen former stations, including at Warsop in my constituency, and directly link my residents back into the national rail network, with connections to Mansfield, Nottingham, Worksop and beyond. Secondly, the Maid Marian line would provide an alternative route into Nottingham, easing pressure on existing lines while allowing for expanded services that would better serve Mansfield and Ashfield, including through improved access to Derby.
The case for those projects is not simply about transport for transport’s sake; it is about economic growth, regeneration and opportunities for communities that have been overlooked for too long. I hope the Minister will begin to work with regional leaders, local authorities and MPs across the east midlands to help to move both those schemes forward. Let us get Mansfield and neighbouring towns fully back on the map—let us reopen the Maid Marian line and extend the Robin Hood line.
As the MP for Strangford, I am frequently contacted about transport issues. There is a significant and growing disparity between urban and rural areas when it comes to transport provision. This affects access to key services such as health care, education and work, as well as access to social activities. There has been a wrongful assumption that focusing transport investment on urban areas will eventually lead to improvements in rural regions through a trickle-down effect. It just does not happen.
Research from 2025 demonstrated that almost a fifth of all rural bus routes in England alone had disappeared over the previous five years. As a result, many people have become reliant on their cars and it has left us in a so-called transport desert.
The evidence from my Strangford constituency and across the UK indicates that social exclusion further compounds mental health issues and decreases the general wellbeing of citizens, with reports of reduced access to employment, education and healthcare. Many people are forced to rely on taxis, which is highly unsustainable, with people losing almost as much as they earn in a day’s work. Employment should be encouraged and not hindered by lack of access to public transport.
As the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen clearly indicated, the consequences have a disproportionate impact on vulnerable groups such as the elderly, children and lower-income households. Given that rural areas often have an older population, access to transport is even more essential. Without support for public transport systems in small towns, a cycle of decline will continue, with reduced public transport usage due to its unreliableness or inefficiency. That will be used as justification for further service cuts, reinforce dependency on cars and weaken the entire transport system.
As the MP for Strangford, I am frequently contacted by constituents concerned about the lack of accessible transport in small towns. There is no rail network and there is a heavy reliance on what bus service there is. Buses can be infrequent and the connections between smaller towns are poor. We have the Strangford ferry, but if the weather is bad, it does not sail. That means that many people, including those taking children to school and those commuting for work, are forced to drive the 50-mile road alternative, putting pressure on the A20.
I believe these issues are really important, and I look forward to the Minister’s response. I know he does not have responsibility for my constituency, but the issues that I have put forward are similar elsewhere. We need to ensure a lifeline and it must be strengthened.
It has been a bumper nearly two years for me in driving to improve the connectivity of the towns and villages in my constituency. I was lucky enough to bring back the No. 15 bus route that connects Woodthorpe and Bishopthorpe on Sundays. However, when I raised the issue in the Chamber, Quentin Letts said people should just get an Uber. We know that that is not an affordable option in towns across the country. The right-wing media bubble just does not get it.
With the Minister’s help, I was lucky enough to secure over £5 million for park-and-ride services in my constituency. I might be the park-and-ride MP, with the highest number of services anywhere. I was also lucky enough to work with First Bus on fare caps for young people and on improving the fare arrangements for young parents who live in the University of York area. Of course, the big one has been bringing in a new station at Haxby, thereby improving connectivity for a town of more than 8,000 people. There is more to do, though, including in respect of the 412 bus, the No. 5 bus and the No. 6 service, and on capping prices for students on the No. 6 bus.
We have not heard too much about the need for active travel, including cycling and getting people on to fantastic bike lanes; I call on developers across York to invest in infrastructure. But I would like to raise a bigger idea that could improve connectivity across small towns. Earlier this year, I was taken over to look at the connectivity in Switzerland—I refer Members to my declaration of interests. What did I see there? Cable cars, buses, trains, trams and boats—all synchronised, end to end. It just works. Why cannot someone in York connect seamlessly on to Leeds, from bus to train, with a timetable that joins up?
I have also suggested a northern Oyster card. Why do we all bang on about London being so productive? The reason is connectivity—the Oyster card. Let’s have it in the north: tap on, tap off, truly integrated transport and fares, not just for our great cities in the north but for the towns between them. Manchester’s Bee Network shows that it can be done, and we also have the Weaver Network in Leeds and the People’s Network in Sheffield. The question is whether we are truly ambitious enough to extend our thinking beyond the M25 to the 15 million great people of the north who would love to see that connectivity.
Small towns should never settle. Connectivity is what determines young people’s futures, so we must do all we can, at all levels, to drive connectivity across our communities.
My constituency has 11 railway stations, the largest port in the country and an international airport, so people might think that it would be of major interest to the Department of Transport, with the focus entirely on the Brigg and Immingham constituency. Sadly, it is not as easy to get around the constituency as people might imagine. In addition, five railway stations in the Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes constituency also serve my constituents. Nevertheless, getting around my area is not as easy as it should be.
The Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), has outlined our long-running campaign—it has been running for 15 years now—to secure a direct service from Cleethorpes, through my constituency, to London. There are five trains a day from King’s Cross to Lincoln, and it would take a small amount of money to run those Azumas through my constituency before they finish their journey in Cleethorpes. However, as my right hon. Friend pointed out, the Department for Transport has made endless objections and said that such a service cannot be delivered.
The Father of the House also mentioned the service from Gainsborough to Cleethorpes, which passes through Brigg. Brigg, a town of 5,500 people, should have better rail connectivity than it does. It has a railway station, and there used to be a roof over all of it. It was a fantastic station—very much like Gainsborough Central used to be—but sadly it is a pale shadow of its former self and now has only one platform, although, unlike Market Rasen station, it has a bridge to allow people to get over to the other platform, even if that other platform is out of use. Improving rail connections through to Cleethorpes is important. It would help the leisure sector considerably.
The service from Cleethorpes through my constituency to Barton-upon-Humber is a two-hourly service. The Barton Cleethorpes community rail partnership, which is very active and takes a close interest in the operation of the service, has been campaigning to increase that to one service every hour. I urge the Minister to consider that proposal if he can.
Let me return to the Brigg service. We hear much about the creation of Great British Rail, but Northern Rail, which runs the service from Gainsborough to Cleethorpes, has been in public ownership since 2020, so the Minister could have delivered on this. I acknowledge that previous Ministers could also have done so, but it is his job now. I challenge him to say, when he responds to the debate, that he will consider and deliver the proposal.
When I was campaigning for election in Amber Valley, people told me time and again that improving public transport was a priority, and it is now one of my local pledges. I am pleased that, after many years of hard work and campaigning by Labour town councillors, a lift has finally been installed at Alfreton station. It has been truly transformational for many of my constituents. In a similar vein, I am now working to improve accessibility at Langley Mill station. The dream is to reinstate the direct train from Alfreton to London, which was sadly cancelled in 2021, despite much protest.
In my remarks, I will concentrate on something raised by my constituent Paul Wright at one of the coffee mornings that I hold monthly so that people in Amber Valley can raise things with me. Ambergate in my constituency is about three miles from the neighbouring town of Belper, and I could get a five-minute train between the two towns for £3.60 today. However, if I take the train from Ambergate to London, it costs me £80.80, whereas if my friend gets on the train one stop later at Belper—and sits right next to me for the entire journey—she pays only £35.50. I love my friend very much, but why should she pay so much less for a near-identical journey?
That example illustrates the absurd situation that my constituents face. It is often cheaper to split their journeys and book them in two parts: from Ambergate to Belper, then from Belper to their end destination—it is not just journeys to London that are affected. That is unfair on multiple levels. Most obviously, it disadvantages those who are unaware of those loopholes, which people such as Paul have had to uncover for themselves. Unless that situation changes, many of my constituents will continue to pay an excessive amount, while their friends down the road pay a lot less.
The system also disproportionately affects those who might not be as confident in navigating split ticketing. The process is not intuitive, and it will alienate those who are already vulnerable or are less digitally literate. Those are exactly the people who depend on the system being simple, accessible, transparent and fair. Why should my constituents have to jump through hoops just to secure a fair price?
I know that the Railways Bill contains measures to bring greater transparency to fare structures, including through the establishment of Great British Railways. Will the Minister outline how those upcoming reforms will ensure that fairness and consistency are built into the system? Will he also outline what can be done in the meantime to resolve those price anomalies for my constituents?
Bus services in Dewsbury and Batley, and across wider West Yorkshire, have undergone a sustained 20-year decline, driven by operator withdrawals, rising costs, driver shortages and reduced post-covid numbers. The pattern is one of progressive route cuts, increased reliance on emergency subsidies and shrinking commercial viability. Nothing illustrates the fragility of the system more clearly than the ongoing instability among local operators. The significant cuts by Arriva across West Yorkshire, rightly described by Mayor Brabin as “appalling”, are the result of a failing business model managed by overseas owners who appear to have little regard for the needs of our communities. Cuts to Arriva bus services between Dewsbury in my constituency and Wakefield in the Minister’s constituency have had a huge impact. The 205 between Dewsbury, Morley and Pudsey has been cut, as has the 117 from Ossett to Leeds—the list is endless.
Another failure is that of Yorkshire Buses, which operated services across West Yorkshire but has ceased trading entirely, citing a “continued rise in costs” that made the business “no longer sustainable”. The consequences are immediate and real. Services across the region have been affected, including bus routes across my constituency. The system needs long-term stability, not constant crisis management. I thank the West Yorkshire Mayor and the West Yorkshire combined authority for stepping in to provide emergency transport when companies go under, but this is not sustainable.
I will conclude my remarks by asking the Minister three questions. What steps will the Government take to ensure that small towns such as Dewsbury and Batley are prioritised in national transport policy, rather than left behind? Will the Government commit to providing sustained, reliable revenue funding for bus services so that routes can operate frequently and dependably, rather than closing constantly? What specific action will be taken to reverse the long-term decline in bus use, particularly among elderly and disabled passengers?
It is a pleasure to be back in Westminster Hall to speak about the No. 1 subject in my inbox. Coalville and Ashby are the seventh and eighth largest towns in Leicestershire, so they are not small, but we still struggle with bus services. As the Minister knows, I rarely miss an opportunity to highlight that I do not have a single passenger rail service anywhere in my constituency. The campaign to reopen the Ivanhoe line is still ongoing.
Those are just the headlines from my constituency; the reality for our towns runs far deeper. Other rural MPs will know that improving transport links is a never-ending discussion. If a bus service is cancelled in North West Leicestershire, there is nothing else—no back-up, no alternative. People are simply stranded; hospital appointments are missed and shift patterns lost. My constituent went to watch Leicester City play football on a Saturday and caught the last bus back to Ashby at 5.30 pm, just a few minutes after the end of the game. However, when the bus terminated halfway in Coalville, the seventh largest town in Leicestershire, they could not get back to Ashby, the eighth largest, after 6 pm on a Saturday. This is not just about getting to work; it is about our night-time economy and the impact on the growth of our towns.
Even when services do exist, they do not always serve people well. New housing estates, which are often just beyond the edges of our town centres, are left disconnected, meaning that residents cannot easily reach the high street, and the high street cannot benefit from the people who live just a few minutes away by bus. When we talk about transport in small towns, we are not talking about getting from A to B; we are talking about whether our town centres survive and thrive. We need to go much further.
I was proud to serve on the Bus Services Bill Committee, and of the work that our Government have done so far—I welcome their commitment to getting more funding to local authorities—but I have three questions for the Minister. First, HS2 was supposed to have gone through my constituency without stopping. Despite writing several letters, I still do not have any resolution for the 74 homes stuck in HS2 Ltd ownership. I want to use that money for the benefit of my constituency. Secondly, there needs to be a better path for concessionary fares, as the situation across the country is uneven. I represent an old population, who use concessionary fares more, so that is a problem for my local authority. Finally, I will say that bus services are for leisure as well as for work.
I have been banging on for months about improving the quality of the Weymouth to London Waterloo service. Passengers have faced unacceptable problems, including frequent delays, often at the weekend; patchy wi-fi; no on-board food trolley service; and, for many years, no accessible toilet at Weymouth station. Over the last few months, I have been working with South Western Railway to resolve some of those issues, and I am pleased to say that finally, after many years, we have reopened an accessible toilet at Weymouth station.
Although of course that is positive news, it is clear that much more must be done to improve the quality of the train service on the Weymouth to Waterloo line. Only this week, I received a complaint from a constituent describing her appalling trip on the late May bank holiday—one of the hottest days of the year, when passengers were unable to access water, and faced totally unusable toilets and bins overflowing with rubbish and used nappies. Last month I experienced all that for myself with a three-hour delay on my regular commute home to Weymouth. Since when did arriving late, dishevelled, hot and dehydrated become fashionable again? We must have work to improve the quality, reliability and speed of the service on the Weymouth to Waterloo line.
Buses are of course an essential way of getting around in a rural community like mine in South Dorset. They help people get to vital health services at Dorset County hospital and Poole hospital, and they ensure that people can get into the town centre and that pupils from rural villages can attend school. Yet, as we have heard repeatedly in today’s debate, too often bus services have been undermined by worsening reliability, fewer buses and the steady loss of routes. For example, in Bovington in my constituency there is no regular all-year-round bus service, which leaves the community—particularly the armed forces families based at Bovington camp—effectively isolated. A similar situation exists in Harman’s Cross, where the No. 40 bus service does not stop, despite serving neighbouring villages. I have met the council and bus operators to push for improvements, but we should not have to deal with a postcode lottery when it comes to accessing good-quality bus services in South Dorset.
I am pleased with the progress that the Government have made in bringing our railways back into public hands and bringing forward landmark new legislation for bus services, but I ask the Minister: what can we do to go further and deliver better buses in rural areas and improve the quality of the London Waterloo to Weymouth train line?
For me, this is about opportunity and fairness. Transport determines whether a young person can get to college, an apprentice can reach a workplace, an older resident can attend a hospital appointment, and a business can recruit the staff it needs. Some 57% of the working-age population in England live in areas with low public transport access to jobs, and 66% of elderly people are unable to reach a hospital within 30 minutes by public transport.
In the recent Milburn review, transport repeatedly emerged as the hidden driver of youth detachment from education, employment and training. If a young person cannot physically reach a college apprenticeship, interview or job opportunity, every other policy intervention becomes irrelevant. The review found that in rural, deprived and coastal communities, transport is a significant practical barrier for those without access to a car or a driving licence. This matters because young people are far less likely to drive than previous generations; the proportion of 17 to 20-year-olds holding a full driving licence has fallen to just 29%.
At the same time, local bus services have disappeared. In the last 15 years bus journeys outside London have fallen by 21%, and bus frequency in West Dorset has fallen by 62%. Some local authorities are experiencing reductions of up to 80%. Entire small towns and villages have lost evening and weekend services. A young person offered a hospitality shift that finishes at night in a neighbouring town without a return bus service has not really been offered a job at all.
That is why transport connectivity must be central to any serious effort to reduce the number of young people who are not in education, employment or training. It is why the Liberal Democrats have argued consistently that we need a fundamentally different approach to public transport in small towns and rural areas. We need properly funded local bus services, and we would replace the current patchwork of funding streams with a single integrated transport fund that gives local authorities the flexibility to deliver the service their communities actually need.
The move towards multi-year funding settlements and the increase in funding for local transport are both welcome. They provide the degree of certainty that councils have been calling for over many years and are a significant improvement on the short-term, stop-start approach of the past. However, they are not enough on their own to reverse the years of decline. Areas outside urban hubs have seen some of the deepest service reductions. They need targeted investment if we are to rebuild sustainable networks, rather than simply to continue managing the decline. We would restore the £2 bus fare cap and ensure that local authorities have resources to expand services where demand exists.
We must also recognise the role that community transport can play. The CB3 community bus service in Beaminster demonstrates what is possible when local communities work together to maintain essential connections. Such models can help bridge gaps where traditional commercial routes are no longer viable, but parish councils and volunteers cannot be expected to carry this burden alone. Community transport needs secure, long-term grant funding from central Government. We would also support pilot programmes and new technologies such as on-demand transport services. Those schemes have proven particularly effective for young people travelling between villages and market towns.
We must also rebuild confidence in our railways. For too long, investment has focused overwhelmingly on cities and flagship projects, while small towns have been left behind. The Liberal Democrats would establish a railway fund, allowing local authorities to bid for funding to improve stations, restore local rail connections and strengthen links between neighbouring towns. We would implement long-term rail fare freezes in line with inflation, introduce a “rail miles” loyalty scheme and create a passenger charter to improve reliability, accessibility and service quality. That would improve things like wi-fi, seating and toilets and put customers at the heart of our railways. We would also reform ticketing by introducing a national tap in, tap out system, bringing the convenience enjoyed by passengers in London and Manchester to the rest of the country.
Local authorities must have greater influence over transport planning, so that rail and bus services work together, rather than operating in isolation. Transport is not just about buses and trains; it is also about giving people safe alternatives to cars. The Liberal Democrats want a nationwide active travel strategy that creates safe walking and cycling networks, linking homes, schools, town centres and transport hubs. For small towns, active travel presents a huge opportunity. Distances are often short enough for cycling to be quicker than driving or public transport, yet frequently the infrastructure is absent. That is why we must support investment in dedicated cycle routes, safer road infrastructure and the conversion of disused railway lines into walking and cycling corridors.
If we are serious about tackling regional inequality, reducing the number of young people who are not working or in education, and delivering genuine economic growth, small towns cannot continue to be an afterthought.
What unites the vast majority of travel needs across our small towns and villages is the importance of personal vehicles and—not instead of—affordable, reliable and useful public transport. Those two elements are critical to connecting small towns. The 2024 national travel survey showed the dominance of the car and other private vehicles, particularly in rural areas. That was alongside buses, which are paramount to supporting local travel. However, I am afraid that under the current Government, there is a mentality that, despite some worthy funding promises and powers to local authorities, risks damaging links to our small towns.
The 2024 travel survey showed that car trips made up 76% of distance travelled. The 2022 survey paints an even stronger picture for those in small towns. Those in rural towns and fringes used their car to travel twice the distance of those in urban conurbations. People in even more isolated areas used their car to travel nearly three times the distance of those in most urban areas. It is critical that the Government’s policies reflect this fact and support drivers in going about their everyday lives. Any other approach would impose self-inflicted damage on our small towns by disrupting the mode of transport most widely used, which in turn contributes to economic growth.
Although I recognise that the classifications are different, as it uses the more traditional rural urban classification system, some of the proposals in the Government’s integrated transport plan, published this April, highlight a complete misunderstanding of the public’s transport needs. The plan says:
“we will consider how we set clear expectations that local authorities and developers should maximise sustainable transport interventions before considering any increase in road capacity.”
That is accompanied by comments in the section on rural and suburban areas that give the impression that cars should only be used as a last resort—a statement devoid of real life. It is the state telling people what it thinks they should want, not listening to what they actually want. Talking about them being relied on in this way completely misses why many people choose to use vehicles—they are making a choice.
Supporting public transport and improving it to enhance links between our small towns is clearly also important—no argument there. In my constituency, I am a supporter of delivering the Haddenham to Thame greenway. However, we cannot do so by sacrificing or denigrating motor vehicle usage. That is indicative of why the Government struggle so much with economic growth. Rather than considering what they can do to improve one form of transport, their integrated transport strategy appears more comfortable trying to encumber drivers either by not increasing capacity or by putting in place policies such as bus priority routes, which in larger areas have done a great deal to restrict the ability to enter towns and some cities.
It is easy to talk about this issue broadly and for it to sound like hyperbole, but we can all reference local examples of our failure to take a balanced and practical approach to transport spending. In Buckinghamshire, the Aylesbury spur of the East West Rail project was originally viewed as an integral part of the scheme. It was removed from the plans during a major cost-cutting exercise about eight or nine years ago, yet the case for restoring it remains as strong as ever. It would vastly improve connectivity between Winslow and Aylesbury, both of which are expected to grow significantly in the coming years, while strengthening onward links to London and the north. Importantly, it would do so in a way that supports economic growth, which the Government repeatedly tell us is their overriding priority. Better connectivity means greater access to jobs and opportunity.
That example, along with the excellent examples from my right hon. Friends the Members for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) and for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh) and my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers), demonstrates the wider point. The challenge facing small towns is not that people have too many transport options; it is that in too many places they do not have enough. The answer is not to make driving harder in the hope that people will choose another mode of transport; it is to improve all forms of connectivity, whether road, bus or rail.
We need to allow people to make the choices that best suit their circumstances. Indeed, the condition of our roads is why the Conservatives have proposed targeted measures to repair potholes and limit damaging policies such as 20 mph by default, which have cropped up in authorities both in urban areas and where small towns are situated.
Furthermore, the bus fare increases that we have seen under this Government pose significant challenges to increasing demand. Although the Government have been reticent to admit it, the fare cap increased on their watch by 50%, and in many areas there have been further increases in the price of buses. That is simply factual. Those decisions impact bus users in our small towns, and it is this Labour Government who are putting the price of buses up. It is inevitable that increasing costs disincentivises travel between these areas. Some authorities are taking on the cost of bus services, and it remains to be seen whether a balance can be struck and services can be improved in a way that persuades people to use bus routes.
This is occurring at the same time that the Government are taking on their project of rail nationalisation, after a period of significant passenger growth over the past three decades. We can debate the challenges around rail and whether the solution could ever be nationalisation, but that increase in numbers is irrefutably beneficial when we consider connections between small towns. I therefore hope the Government consider the measures put forward by the shadow Rail Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew), which highlight the importance of passenger growth in the Government’s proposals.
Small towns do not need transport policies that pit one mode of travel against another. They need practical solutions that improve mobility across the board.
My hon. Friend has spoken consistently about the importance of reliable and affordable transport connections for communities across Rossendale and Darwen. For too long, small towns have been held back by poor connectivity, whether because of limited bus services, unreliable rail links or the day-to-day frustrations of deteriorating local roads. We are determined to change that.
My hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters) talked about connectivity. Transport in this country has been fragmented for too long. Through the Better Connected strategy, we are changing that. We are setting out a national vision for an integrated, accessible and safe transport network that people can rely on to make the journeys they need to make easily, wherever they live across England. By taking a holistic approach to transport, we can make a real difference for communities through improved connectivity, integrated ticketing and improved cross-modal connections, so that even those without direct rail links are connected to the wider network. Transport should feel like a single joined-up system, not a series of disconnected parts.
Local leaders are key to delivering this vision. They know the transport challenges their areas face and are best placed to decide how to improve transport in their areas. We are backing local leaders in every local transport authority to make improvements by providing £21 billion of local transport funding through simplified multi-year funding settlements.
The majority of local transport funding is allocated by formula to give a fair share of funding for all areas. For example, our formulas take into account the length of roads, population size and rurality, so that funding reflects an area’s circumstances and need.
The multi-year settlements will give areas the certainty they need to plan ahead, so that they are more flexible and local leaders can invest in the transport priorities that are right for their areas. Places with an elected mayor will benefit from either integrated settlements or a single mayoral transport fund, giving them more flexibility over how they use their funding. That reflects the fact that mayors are recognisable figures in their areas and accountable to their citizens, with mandates to represent them on the national stage. However, local transport authorities without a mayor will also benefit from simplified funding and will receive transformative multi-year flexible integrated transport funds and bus services funding. To support local leaders further, we published updated local transport plan guidance earlier this year, setting out what we expect local transport authorities to deliver in their areas and how to make the most of their transport funding.
Improvements to buses are vital, particularly for communities in small towns, communities in rural areas and—I say this before my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume) gives me the look—coastal communities. Buses are the only transport option in some places, but through the Bus Services Act 2025 we have given local leaders the tools they need to ensure that local bus services meet the needs of local people. These tools are accessible not only to mayoral authorities, but to all local transport authorities across England, with the Department for Transport providing support through the franchising support fund and franchising pilots programme. This work includes funding to develop pilot programmes that test different models of franchising through a small number of rural LTAs.
DFT is also funding a franchising expert group, which will provide expert support and advice on bus franchising to authorities and could be engaged to aid with troubleshooting and challenges such as cross-border services, which we addressed in the Bus Services Act but are important for local areas to consider when drawing up their bus service improvement plans. As well as targeted franchising support, we are providing meaningful funding to support and improve bus networks—a total of £3 billion over the next three years.
The hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) talked about the challenges in West Yorkshire, which I absolutely understand. I am sure that he will welcome the move by Mayor Tracy Brabin to introduce the Weaver network, and that he is as excited as I am to see the difference that it will make.
To ensure that rural areas are not disadvantaged, the individual allocations were determined using a revised formula that considered the needs of each local transport authority, taking into account population size, levels of deprivation, bus service provision and, for the first time, rurality.
The hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine) asked about ensuring that all areas can take advantage of bus franchising. Back in September 2024, I laid a statutory instrument that opened up bus franchising to all local transport authorities—one of the first things I did on coming into government. Lancashire combined county authority’s funding settlement includes £56 million for buses, which can be used to enhance local bus services in rural areas.
Active travel has a really important role to play, particularly in making shorter journeys to shops, GP practices and leisure facilities in our towns. Funding for high-quality active travel infrastructure is critical, and this Government are providing significant investment. In December, we announced £626 million for local authorities between 2026-27 and 2029-30 to deliver walking, wheeling and cycling schemes—enough for 500 miles of new walking and cycling routes. That is in addition to almost £300 million of funding announced in February 2025 and a further £108 million in March 2026.
My hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen mentioned pavement parking. The Government are taking action to ensure that pavements are for people, including parents with young children, people using wheelchairs and those with sight loss—everyone. We will legislate to allow local transport authorities to prohibit pavement parking. They will also have powers to exempt locations where pavement parking would still be necessary to ensure traffic flow, such as narrow streets, and we will monitor the effectiveness of these measures through baselining and evaluation of research.
The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), has some cheek to talk about potholes! For many constituents, the most visible sign of under-investment is the condition of highways. We are taking action to support local authorities in tackling the pothole plague inherited from the previous Government, including by providing a record £7.3 billion of multi-year funding for highways—it will have almost doubled by the end of this Parliament. We are clear that local authorities should focus on long-term preventive maintenance, as well as long-lasting repairs.
However, I recognise that smaller and more rural communities are particularly vulnerable to disruption caused by street works. Lane rental can play an important role in tackling such disruption by allowing highway authorities to charge those carrying out works up to £2,500 per day when they occupy the busiest roads at the busiest times. That creates a clear incentive to plan works more effectively, shift activity outside peak periods and complete works more quickly. The Government strongly support the continued roll-out of lane rental, and we are currently finalising our assessment of 13 further applications. At the same time, we are developing approval powers for mayors of strategic authorities. That will support faster, more responsive delivery of schemes while reducing congestion, improving journey reliability and improving disruption.
Rail has a critical role to play and was mentioned numerous times by Members. I am sure that the Rail Minister will have heard about all the individual schemes mentioned today, so I will not go into them, but connecting small towns is critical for the wider economy. Reliable commuter rail services can transform opportunities, making it easier for people to access jobs in nearby cities while continuing to live in the communities that they value. We are working with industry partners to improve the reliability and performance of commuter routes and ensure that smaller stations are not overlooked. That includes looking at how timetables, capacity and infrastructure can better support passengers travelling to and from smaller towns, including those in Lancashire.
My hon. Friend is a great champion for the people of Rossendale and Darwen. He will be aware that the Department is not currently funding any development work on either of the proposals that he mentioned, but my officials are very happy to support Lancashire county combined authority should any local funding be prioritised on either the City Valley rail link or the new station at Lower Darwen.
The Government are also committed to ensuring that non-mayoral authorities are fully engaged in GBR’s work and not disadvantaged as the new rail system is implemented. All tiers of local government will benefit from an empowered local GBR business unit that is outward-facing and engages local authorities on their priorities and their local transport plans. That structure will provide a single point of accountability for local authorities, rather than baking in the fragmented structure that we have today.
That engagement will ensure that there is sufficient opportunity for local authorities to collaborate with GBR on their priorities and consider their proposals. That approach is designed to ensure that GBR is as close as possible to local communities so that it can understand and respond to their needs, while being clear that they are part of a national system that needs to work coherently as a whole.
My hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Linsey Farnsworth) rightly raised rail fares, which are a real concern for many passengers, especially when services are unreliable. The current fare system is complex and confusing, and passengers do not always trust that they are getting the right ticket. We are simplifying fares and ticketing so that passengers can easily find the best fare for their journey and get more consistent offers across the network under Great British Railways. Alongside reform, we have also frozen regulated fares for the first time in 30 years, which will help with the cost of living while improving reliability and service quality.
In closing, I reiterate my thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen for securing this debate and to all Members for their contributions today. Improving transport in small towns is central to this Government’s mission to drive growth and opportunity across the whole country. We know there is more to do, but we are already taking meaningful steps to ensure that wherever possible, wherever people live, whether that be in a city, a rural area, a small town or a coastal town, they have access to the reliable, affordable and integrated transport that they deserve.
Although I thank the Minister for all he said and all the positive moves that are being made, I respectfully say that there is still a disconnection between what we are doing in mayoral strategic authorities and non-mayoral areas, where so much is left to whether a given non-mayoral authority has the capacity and capability to bring forward these schemes. The Government may be doing great things and bringing forward great opportunities, but if a local authority does not have the capacity, capability, or indeed desire, to grasp these opportunities on behalf of their communities, we are left behind, as in Lancashire, Shropshire, Cheshire and so many other places.
We need to do more to make that connection and finally recognise that the big infrastructure projects have to impact our small towns. That requires proactivity in the project design and spending envelopes. We have £46 billion allocated for Northern Powerhouse Rail—surely some of that needs to go to connecting our small towns.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered transport links for small towns.
Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.