PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Rural Cycling Infrastructure - 10 December 2024 (Commons/Westminster Hall)

I beg to move,

That this House has considered cycling infrastructure in rural areas.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the Minister for being here to listen to this important debate, and I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I am a member of Oxfordshire county council.

During my time living in the Netherlands as a young student, not so many years ago, I experienced at first hand the ease of cycling. Villages and towns are interconnected by safe cycle routes, which make taking a bike the obvious choice. I fondly remember cycling from my university in Leiden to the beach in Katwijk. Never once did I feel concerned about the quality of roads or any danger; never once did I feel the need to take a car.

Later, living in Brussels, I saw the stark differences between the traditionally cycle-friendly Flemish region and the car-dominated capital city. However, conscious policy decisions are changing cities. Brussels, like many capital cities across Europe, including our own, is now reclaiming road space from private motor vehicles and giving it over to active travel.

I am proud to be part of the administration in Oxfordshire that pedestrianised the famous Broad Street, much to the criticism of local Conservatives, and is rolling out further measures across the city. These policy decisions in cities demonstrate that there is no natural order to transport infrastructure. Transport choices are made consciously and by design. Although much more needs to be done in cities and towns, rural areas risk being left behind, and the consequences are paid in lives lost and lives ruined.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and constituency neighbour for giving way, and I congratulate him on securing this debate. He talked about connecting villages. In Oxford West and Abingdon we have Botley and Eynsham, which are both growing in population, but whenever designs are put forward, they are often missing the pots of money. Even though we tried to get a design linked to the expansion of the A40, we were told that we could not, because if we did, that bid would fail. That is entirely the opposite of what we would expect from a modal shift. Does my hon. Friend agree that the funding pots available and how they connect are at odds with what the Government say they want to do, particularly regarding a modal shift towards biking and other forms of active travel?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that funding is key to resolving these issues. In particular, slashing the active travel fund from £200 million to £50 million, as the Conservatives did in 2023, was shameful.

While much more needs to be done in towns and cities, more also needs to be done in rural areas. Mortality rates on rural roads are 2.7 times higher per mile cycled than on urban roads. If the Government continue to ignore rural areas in policy development, it could have devastating consequences.

I congratulate the hon. Member on securing this debate. I am very lucky that my constituency is interconnected by a series of rivers and canals, the Mid Cheshire waterways ring. When I am among council officers, I refer to it as “the fellowship of the ring”, just so they remember. It runs 26 miles around my constituency and is crying out to be used as a cycleway. It is far safer to use canal towpaths than traditional cycleways. They are already traffic-free, and it is much cheaper to develop the infrastructure and implement it. That potential no doubt exists nationwide. Does he agree that there is significant untapped potential for rolling out a cycle network across our canal towpath network?

I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. I agree that we could make better use of the significant infrastructure that is already in place, whether that is canal towpaths or former railways and other such infrastructure.

I am calling on the Government today to commit to investing in safe, off-road cycling routes and segregated cycle lanes in rural areas. In Oxfordshire, I am pleased to share with this Chamber that the Liberal Democrat-led administration is taking steps to link up towns and villages that are characteristic of the stunning Chilterns national landscape, Oxford green belt and wider open countryside. The county has adopted Vision Zero, the ambition to eliminate deaths and serious injuries on our roads by 2030. It has already developed a strategic active travel network that draws lines on the map of prioritised cycle routes that would connect towns and villages to one another and to Oxford and cities of the surrounding counties. Yet for now, they remain just lines on a map, unfunded. The county adopted a new model to replace the old car-centric “predict and provide” methodology for deciding infrastructure and replaced it with “decide and provide”. Oxfordshire has decided, but it lacks the central Government funding needed to provide.

Even getting a simple project off the ground is a challenge. The Thame to Haddenham greenway is a project that has been mooted for more than 20 years. It would connect the market town of Thame, the largest settlement in the Henley and Thame constituency, to the nearby village of Haddenham in Buckinghamshire, just two miles away. Crucially, Haddenham is host to the Thame and Haddenham Parkway rail station that links the town to London. Cycling from Thame to Haddenham currently requires a high degree of confidence and a tolerance for risk to mix in alongside the heavy traffic of the A418.

The wildly popular Phoenix trail from Thame to Princes Risborough already proves high demand for off-road rural cycle infrastructure, but it is not just funding that is stifling the rural cycling revolution. Compulsory purchase powers are often wielded to make progress on road projects but are not used to deliver cycle infrastructure. This means that most projects barely get beyond the idea phase.

A cycleway that links Chinnor to Watlington via the village of Lewknor in my constituency, which sits just next to the M40, would transform the lives of thousands of people by providing an active travel link to London and Oxford via the Oxford tube. However, ideas never make it beyond a general agreement that it would be quite nice, because local landowners oppose it. I urge the Government to break free from the visionless Conservative legacy and take on these barriers to change. The Government must stop the lip service of the past.

In 2017, a walking and cycling strategy aimed to make active travel a natural choice. The Department for Transport active travel fund was set up to reallocate road space to cyclists and pedestrians and create an environment that is safer for walking and cycling. But words are cheap and here we are, seven years later. In rural areas, active travel is far from the natural choice.

In 2023, the Conservative Government, in a fit of reactionary culture wars, slashed the already paltry active travel budget from £200 million to just £50 million. Under this Government, I therefore welcome the increase in that budget to £150 million. However, let us not pretend that that will create a step change. The Conservatives had the budget at £200 million just three years ago. The Government should deliver on their promise to invest at unprecedented levels in active travel.

I hope that as a result of this debate, the Minister will consider increasing funding levels further for the 2025-26 period during the Department’s current planning discussion. I ask that because cycling in rural areas as a mode of transport will deliver concrete benefits for the economy, the environment, health and wellbeing. For every pound spent on cycling and walking schemes, £5.62-worth of wider benefits is achieved. In 2022, active travel contributed £36 billion to the economy. Cycling networks give rise to tourism and flourishing local businesses, encouraging institutions and services to set up in or return to areas.

It is a privilege and a joy to live surrounded by nature in the villages and towns of my constituency, but it can also be isolating. Many villages lack places to exercise and few have regular buses to the places that do. The latest data for Oxfordshire shows that 58% of people in the county are overweight, and one in three year 6 children are overweight or abuse. Cycling is an obvious means to increase physical activity in areas where small populations can make commercial or council-supported leisure centres unviable.

If we truly believe that there is a climate emergency, and I do, rural Britain must be part of the transformation, too. Reduced motor traffic limits carbon dioxide emissions and reduces nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter, with both gases linked to respiratory failure, stroke, heart disease, dementia and premature death. Do not think that just because rural areas are surrounded by fields that the risk is not present in the countryside, too. Historic towns can create choke points, quite literally, as vehicles move through them. Watlington’s Couching Street has been an air quality management area since 2009, as traffic passes through in search of the M40. Again, cycling must be part of the picture, and that is before we talk about the mental health benefits, which I will perhaps leave others to touch on.

We have a golden opportunity over the next five years to see the transformation needed. I am willing to work cross-party with anyone in Government, and MPs and councillors across Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Berkshire, to seize it. I hope others will join me.

I expect to call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson at 5.46 pm, so given the number of Members wishing to speak, there will be an informal time limit of between four and five minutes.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. Cycling infrastructure in rural areas across my constituency is poor and, in most cases, non-existent. Too many of our towns and villages lack the connectivity required to make them easily reachable by bike, often including roads that cannot be cycled on and no feasible alternative routes. Even as a keen and confident sports cyclist, there are a number of routes in Huntingdon that I avoid using because they are objectively too dangerous to cycle on. That is evident when considering the impracticality of travelling into Huntingdon and St Ives by bicycle from many of our surrounding villages, which makes commuting by bike for work or school too difficult for too many.

St Ives is a town that desperately needs people to work and shop within it, yet it is largely reliant upon people driving into it. There are persistent traffic problems approaching the town from the east, with the Harrison Way roundabout a constant issue during peak times. Yet the Needingworth Road, which connects Colne, Bluntisham, Earith and Needingworth itself to St Ives, is the A1123—fast and arrow-straight, not well lit, and a road I would not advise anyone to cycle on.

Approaching St Ives from the north, we have the Somersham Road. Although only a B road, it is again arrow-straight and very fast, with significant use by lorries. It also includes the Wheatsheaf crossroads, which has seen a number of road traffic accidents. The county council is yet to spend the money that it has allocated to upgrade the junction and make it safer.

Huntingdon is particularly poorly served. In theory, the town has a cycle path around the ring road, but it is a shared cycle path with pedestrians that, in places, is no wider than a single individual. The tragic death of cyclist Celia Ward in 2020, who fell into the road after an altercation with a pedestrian on the cycle path, illustrates its unsuitability.

Approaching Huntingdon from villages to the north, towards the Wyton roundabout on the A141 into Hertford, is again a journey fraught with danger, and not one I would expect any cyclist to undertake as part of their daily commute. The A141 is one of the busiest and fastest roads in the constituency. In response to the recent consultation, I made it clear that cycling infrastructure must be considered in any new plans.

Meanwhile, there is only one current cycling infrastructure project under discussion in the constituency. As part of its plans to improve the national cycle network, Sustrans has proposed a quietway, closing the Grafham Road to motor vehicles between the villages of Grafham and Brampton. I regularly use that road as a cyclist, but it is also a vital lifeline between the two villages, and it reduces the need to take the more circuitous routes to the north and south that involve dual carriageways.

Opposition to the scheme from local residents, including those who are cyclists, has been significant, with many well-attended local parish meetings held to discuss it. The road is not busy, so a more sensible decision would be to reduce the speed limit from the current national speed limit to a more realistic 20 mph, thereby making the route far friendlier to pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians alike, without the need to ban motor vehicles and cut the village off.

In Tilbrook, the parish council is working hard to establish a feasibility assessment for the proposed “Kim Valley Way” cycle path, linking the villages of Tilbrook and Kimbolton and eliminating the need to cycle on a fast and sweeping country road with poor visibility on bends for those wishing to travel between the two villages by bike. It is schemes such as these—designed by locals, for locals—that we should invest our time and effort into delivering, rather than top-down diktats that lack local buy-in.

We must ensure that when cycling infrastructure is proposed, it is done so sympathetically and with the needs of local communities in mind. Attempting to railroad through a proposal because it looks good on paper is where schemes such as the Grafham quietway have gone wrong. A lack of engagement, a lack of understanding of rural needs and a lack of strategic planning are the reasons that we have reached the point where, in a constituency like Huntingdon, cycling is not considered to be viable for so many in rural communities.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. Please accept my apologies, because I am likely to have to leave before the conclusion of the debate as I am hosting an event elsewhere on the estate. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) on securing this debate. It is a privilege to speak on a matter that is of great relevance to communities like those in my Lewes constituency.

While cycling is often associated with urban transport solutions, it holds untapped potential to transform rural areas, if we address the challenges that prevent it from being a viable option for many. Two weeks ago, I had the pleasure of attending the Cycle Lewes annual general meeting. That dedicated group has been advocating for safer, more accessible cycling in Lewes and surrounding villages since 1998. Their work, from installing new cycle racks to critiquing transport plans that prioritise cars over active travel, is a testament to the power of local campaigning. However, as was made clear at the AGM, piecemeal progress cannot overcome the systemic barriers to cycling that rural communities face.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way, and I thank you for your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I am from Stroud and for the past six years, even before I became a politician, I have been trying to get a greenway established in the village of Dursley that would run for about six miles to the train station. I found that there was not even funding for a feasibility study, so at the moment, we cannot get it off the ground. So I want to ask the Minister whether there will be a fund to make feasibility studies of new routes.

Not being the Minister, I do not know, but I am sure that he will respond accordingly, and I hope that the answer will be yes, because that would be a fantastic thing to do. I know that county councils and other authorities have really struggled to find the funding for active travel undertakings across the country. We have certainly seen that in East Sussex, as the hon. Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) has in his area.

Cycling is more than a recreational activity. It is an essential mode of transport that can improve public health, reduce carbon emissions and ease the financial burden of transport for households. Nationally, cycling directly contributes an estimated £5.4 billion annually to the economy, including £4.1 billion from reduced mortality, air pollution, and congestion. Every pound invested in walking and cycling infrastructure generates more than £5 in benefits. Cycling also promotes land-use efficiency, requiring far less space than roads or car parks—a critical consideration for creating greener, more liveable communities. For predominantly rural areas like mine, that represents an opportunity to create healthier, greener and more connected communities. Without serious investment, rural residents will continue to face unsafe roads, insufficient cycling facilities and limited transport options.

In communities like mine, the reality is stark. Public transport options are patchy and many depend on cars for short journeys. Safe and accessible cycling infrastructure could provide an alternative that is not only affordable, but sustainable. Where we have dedicated cycle routes, such as the outstanding separated cycling routes alongside the A27 between Lewes and Polegate in my constituency, they are often unconnected to any ongoing routes, which limits the number of people that can use them.

Better road maintenance is required. We need to create conditions in which cycling is a realistic option for commuting, shopping and even leisure—not just for the young, pale and male but for everybody. Inclusivity must be central to our approach. Whether it is for children cycling to school, older residents using e-bikes or families making short trips, cycling infrastructure should cater to a diverse range of needs. It is about ensuring that everybody can benefit from the independence, affordability and health benefits that cycling offers.

The Liberal Democrats have been clear in our commitment to reverse funding cuts and in pushing for a nationwide active travel strategy. In rural areas, that includes prioritising safe cycling routes, linking active travel to public transport and ensuring that local councils have the resources to tackle potholes and maintain pavements and cycleways, as well as to invest in active travel infrastructure. I urge the Government to recognise that cycling is not just a solution for urban areas, but a vital tool for rural communities. By investing in cycling infrastructure, we can reduce transport poverty, improve public health and build a greener future for areas like Sussex. Let us not miss this opportunity to make cycling safe, accessible and inclusive for all.

It is customary to wait to hear what the Minister says—you might be delighted.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank the hon. Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) for securing the debate.

Wokingham is a semi-rural constituency where it is possible to cycle between villages and towns, and to railway stations, schools and shops. National and local surveys tell us that the majority of people would be willing to do this, but they do not consider it to be safe. It is a difficult issue to resolve on narrow and busy country roads. Reducing speed limits can help, and the council is looking at some of them, but ultimately we need to invest in cycle routes away from the roads. The previous Government were funding such schemes, up until they decided that their electoral interest demanded otherwise, but since 2022 the funding available to local authorities has been wholly inadequate, and it remains so.

Shifting just a small proportion of local rural traffic from car to bike will help to solve many problems, including congestion, parking and air-quality issues in towns. There are mental and physical health benefits for those who cycle. The House of Commons Library has been helpful in pointing out a University of Oxford study that demonstrates the environmental benefits of active travel. Published in 2021, it found that switching just one trip a day from driving a car to cycling can reduce a person’s carbon footprint by 0.5 tonnes a year. As demonstrated by the Elizabeth line, if the infrastructure is there, people will use it. Across Europe, the benefits are being embraced, while the UK fails to recognise the return on investment that is waiting to be realised.

The former Secretary of State for Transport, the right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh), stated that her Department would deliver “unprecedented levels of funding” for active travel; will the new Secretary of State commit to the same promise? Wokingham borough council has previously bid for an off-road route between Charvil and Twyford station; will the Minister commit to review the business case for investment in such cycling schemes?

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) for securing this important debate on rural cycling infrastructure.

Members present appreciate the unique challenges faced by cyclists in rural areas, and the need to ensure their safety if we are to promote greater accessibility for cycling as a mode of transport. Rural roads present unique risks: they are typically narrower, less well maintained, and shared with fast-moving vehicles. In places in my West Dorset constituency roads are also shared with horse riders, who are similarly desperately in need of safety infrastructure.

The road conditions make cycling on roads disproportionately dangerous. Statistics show that cyclists are almost twice as likely to be killed on a rural road as on an urban one. For my constituency the challenge is clear: only 1.7% of people cycle to work, and that figure is well below the already appallingly low national average of 2.1%. Both figures reflect the deterrent effect of unsafe rural roads and the lack of cycling infrastructure, but also the wider picture of cycling in this country.

Cycling can provide an affordable, sustainable and accessible alternative for shorter journeys, not to mention the benefits to the environment and to physical and mental wellbeing. In West Dorset, 50% of people drive to work, 14% of households do not own a car and 30% of residents travel less than 10 km to work. That distance is more than achievable by bicycle for most individuals. Between Bridport and West Bay, the old railway has been repurposed as a cycling and walking path, with many residents hoping that it can be extended all along the old line to Maiden Newton to avoid their having to use country lanes. Similarly, an alternative cycle route between Bridport and Chideock would mean that residents and tourists alike could avoid the main coast artery of the A35, with its heavy goods vehicles.

Public transport in West Dorset is limited and irregular. Congestion on our few A roads and many country lanes causes delays and disruption in our villages. Cycling would reduce congestion, provide people with greater freedom to travel independently, reduce the environmental impact and support healthier lifestyles. I urge the Government to take immediate steps to address these issues and support rural constituencies such as West Dorset by making cycling a safer and more viable option.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) for securing what is an important debate for rural constituencies such as his and mine. Too often, only urban areas attract the focus for funding and infrastructure when it comes to active travel, yet the benefits to physical and mental health and wellbeing and in reducing carbon dioxide emissions and improving air quality are just as applicable, if not more so, in rural areas such as my North Cornwall constituency.

Cornwall is a region with very poor transport infrastructure and high car dependence. The Cornwall local transport plan sets out an ambition for at least 50% of journeys under 5 miles to be completed via active travel by 2030, which is only five years from now. A road network sufficiently free from harm and fear of harm supports wider environmental and public health ambitions and encourages and sustains the adoption of healthier, active modes of travel.

We have in my constituency one of the most popular off-road multi-use trails in the country—the Camel trail. Recent data shows that each year the existing trail attracts more than 400,000 users, of whom more than 50% are residents of Cornwall, and two thirds of these users are cyclists. Currently, only 1% of these trips are used to commute to work. However, with the growing popularity of e-bikes, this use has huge potential to grow.

Early feasibility work by Sustrans shows that there are two ways that the current trail could be significantly expanded to deliver cycling networks that are sufficiently free from risk or fear of harm to make the option of active travel, and especially cycling, an attractive alternative to using the car. I discussed the first expansion option with the Minister recently, so I hope he will bear with me as I set it out once again. The trail, which utilises a redundant railway line that follows the River Camel, could be extended inland to make its final destination the old market town of Camelford—providing much-needed regeneration and giving the residents who live there greater access to the countryside and a viable non-car commuter route to the larger towns of Bodmin and Wadebridge and elsewhere. That not only would help to meet Cornwall’s active travel ambitions, but could provide the Government with an opportunity to meet one of their manifesto promises—to improve responsible access to nature and create nine new national river walks.

The second option would be to introduce a network of quiet lanes across the wider rural area, which would provide connectivity between outlying villages and the Camel trail, offering local people viable options for active travel for their day-to-day living needs. A feasibility study for that has already been conducted by local councillor Dominic Fairman.

The key design principles for rural quiet lanes are as follows. There is the introduction of 30-mph speed limits on roads that already have low motor vehicle flows. People walking, running, cycling and, where appropriate, horse riding should feel safe and comfortable to use the routes, and all users should be aware of those with whom they are sharing the surface of the lane or road, with signage and markings where appropriate. Quiet lanes are a key solution to connect people in rural areas. On many routes, there is insufficient space to build cycle tracks and other infrastructure next to roads. Quiet lanes can also help facilitate a rural modal shift by making people feel safer when using what are already light-traffic lanes for walking and cycling.

We need greater investment to start addressing rural transport poverty. We should make schemes such as those I have outlined a reality and deliver transport infrastructure fit for the carbon-neutral world to which we are aspiring. If the Government really are serious about their claim that they will cut GP appointments by millions by delivering unprecedented investment in our cycling and walking infrastructure, they must consider schemes such as the Camel trail connect project. We do not have a single main line train station in my North Cornwall constituency, but we already have a world-class cycle trail. Now is the time to expand it and fund that shovel-ready plan.

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) for securing this debate, and the hon. Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) for his excellent pun.

My home constituency of Tewkesbury is a patchwork of rural towns and villages. Public transport is either scarce or entirely absent, so cycling is an oft relied-upon mode of transport. Safe, managed cycle routes are vital for many of my constituents as a means to connect with our cathedral city of Gloucester to our south, the cultural centre of Cheltenham to our east, and the medieval town of Tewkesbury to our west. Only in those larger population centres can many of my constituents access their hospitals, schools, stores or social clubs.

Cycling in our rural communities comes at significant risk. As has already been stated, according to at least one study, cyclists involved in collisions on rural roads are more than twice as likely to suffer mortality than those on urban roads. There are several factors for that, including the time it takes for emergency services to arrive from major hospitals to our rural villages. Another factor seems to be that cycling infrastructure and roads in rural areas are poorly funded or neglected. Apparently, cycling routes are rarely considered alongside major highways infrastructure projects. There must be joined-up thinking to such projects to improve the viability of cycling as an environmentally friendly and healthy alternative to driving.

The Gloucestershire cycle spine is an ambitious plan to link Gloucestershire’s major population centres with some of our emerging population centres. The plan was initially met with significant public support, but several shortcomings with it have since caused outcry. Issues cited by residents in Longlevens including the fact that the camber of the cycleway draws water away from drainage and floods their properties with rainwater. In Churchdown, the road has been so narrowed to accommodate the cycleway that larger vehicles can now barely pass each other in places. A clear opportunity to link a cycleway to our heritage railway was missed.

This is not a pitch against such schemes; it is a call to keep the public engaged and ensure the projects are implemented not piecemeal but as a joined-up infrastructure plan so that the “so whats” are asked and answered ahead of the works. I am disappointed to learn that a shortfall in the central Government funding for Gloucestershire county council could mean a significant drop in the allocation for the Gloucestershire cycle spine. Consequently, the 14,000 residents of Bishop’s Cleeve will remain cut off from it.

Like other transport networks, cycling needs to be treated as a vital part of our infrastructure. It must be planned strategically and funded sustainably for the long term.

If no other Members wish to speak, I call the Lib Dem spokesperson, Steff Aquarone.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) on securing this debate on such an important issue. He is a great champion of this cause. I know that he and his Liberal Democrat colleagues across Oxfordshire will continue to push for progress in their area.

I refer Members to my declaration in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests as a member of Norfolk county council, but I must declare an even more important interest, which is that I am a rural cyclist. It is for that reason that I am so pleased to respond to today’s debate for the Liberal Democrats.

In my area, we have some fantastic cycling routes. In Wells and Holkham, people can join national cycle network route 1 and travel through the north of the constituency as part of the Norfolk-wide rebellion way. Towards North Walsham, we have the Weavers way, which takes in much of the track bed of the former Midland and Great Northern joint railway.

The Liberal Democrats and I are ambitious for the future of rural cycling across the country. We want to see new cycle networks, and locally Liberal Democrats are working with communities to deliver on new cycling schemes in their local areas. It is a great shame that the previous Conservative Government did not match our ambition or enthusiasm for the future of cycling. They ruthlessly cut £200 million from the active transport budget, just after so many of us rediscovered our love for walking and cycling during lockdown.

That neglect for walking and cycling seems endemic within the Conservatives. Our Conservative-led county council has sunk £50 million into the white elephant that is the 6 km western link road. The legal and exploratory costs alone could have instead funded high-quality cycle super-highways six times the eventual proposed distance of that road. With attitudes like that, it is easy to see how our rural cycling infrastructure has deteriorated so badly over the previous decade, with Norfolk losing many of its routes from the national cycle network in 2020 after years of neglect and lack of upkeep.

Cycling will play a key part in the rural transport revolution, which so many parts of our country desperately need. We must make sure that cycling routes join up with public transport networks, so that people can safely and easily cycle to their nearest train or bus station. In my rural area, we have one of the highest levels of road per person in the country, and we cannot afford to maintain them all. Is it not time that we looked to convert underused and under-classified roads into access-only roads that prioritise walking and cycling? I am sure that many people would far rather hear the dinging of bike bells nearby than large lorries clattering through small country lanes.

I am passionate about seeing an improvement in rural cycling infrastructure across Norfolk and the rest of the country. Making cycling more accessible and attractive has only benefits. It keeps us healthier, it reduces carbon emissions and it gives us greater opportunity to explore and enjoy our natural environment. I very much hope that we hear from the Minister that the Government will match the passion and ambition of Liberal Democrats across the country to deliver better cycling infrastructure for us all.

I call the Opposition spokesperson.

It is lovely to see you in the Chair, Ms Vaz, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) on securing the debate. We have heard from many of the speakers today about the enormous benefits of cycling, and let us start with the most important one: it is enjoyable. It is healthy, and it gives people cardiovascular exercise, which leads to a better quality of life. Then there are the public sector aspects of it, which are reduced traffic congestion, reduced public transport crowding and reduced emissions in our hunt for net zero. However, it is not all positive, as there are a couple of negatives. One is the examples of road entitlement that we get from some aspects of the cycling community. I am a member of that community, and I hope I am not too entitled when I am on my saddle. The worst one, of course, is that we are exposed to MAMILs around our constituencies. I threatened my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) that I would namecheck him in that regard, because I saw him just this morning in his Lycra.

However, on balance, it is a huge net positive to us as individuals and to us as a society that we encourage cycling. That is exactly what the last Conservative Administration did, despite the brickbats thrown at them in a number of the speeches we have heard this afternoon. For example, the Liberal Democrat spokesman, my neighbour the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone), said that there were ruthless cuts to the active travel budget. However, he did not give credit to the previous Government for creating the fund in the first place, back in 2017. Yes, as the current Administration are beginning to find out, there is a need to take difficult decisions—I have heard that phrase more than once in the past few weeks—about how to spend public money, because it can only be spent once, but the previous Government invested £6.6 billion from central Government funding into active travel from 2016 to March 2025. That helped to create the national cycle network, which is some 12,000 miles of specialist cycle routes, but there is more to do. In my constituency, we have great cycle routes such as Marriott’s way, the Weavers’ way and the Peddars way—which was not mentioned earlier, but also links into our local community—but there are also frustrations. At the moment, we are dualling the section of the A47 in my constituency. A cycle route has been planned beside the dual carriageway, but with just a few hundred yards from North Burlingham, it could be linked into Acle and a much wider network. There is definitely more work to be done, because that was not part of the original scheme.

I welcome the Budget announcement that £100 million will go into cycling and walking infrastructure, but I am slightly concerned that that will happen only if the funding is confirmed in the Department for Transport’s business planning process. The same goes for any funding over the two years after that. What will happen as a result of the spending review? I should be very grateful if the Minister would expand on his commitment to be a strong advocate for active travel with His Majesty’s Treasury when it comes to the spending review. Can he confirm that that is one of his Department’s key objectives?

It is not just cycle routes, though; we also use roads in the rural community. In fact, the vast majority of us who cycle regularly in the countryside use our roads—typically our B roads—as the mechanism for doing so. Because of changing weather patterns, potholes are an ever-increasing scourge. The last Administration spent £8.3 billion on road repairs, but I am the first to admit that there is plenty more work to be done. Potholes have a particular impact on cyclists, who typically ride towards the edge of the carriageway; that can be a real challenge for us as riders. Can the Minister also give reassurance that he will continue to advocate for increased investment in road infrastructure to support active travel and safer, well-maintained roads for all users, including cyclists?

I again congratulate the hon. Member for Henley and Thame. He is right to highlight the benefits and challenges of cycling in the rural community, and I look forward to the Minister’s response, in which he will no doubt tell us all the things he will do to support that important activity.

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Henley and Thame (Freddie van Mierlo) on raising this important issue. He represents a constituency in a very beautiful part of rural England that, despite its proximity to the capital, is largely rural in nature. I thank the hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran) and my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) for their interventions, and I thank the hon. Members for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty), for Lewes (James MacCleary), for Wokingham (Clive Jones), for West Dorset (Edward Morello), for North Cornwall (Ben Maguire), for Tewkesbury (Cameron Thomas) and for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) and my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) for their contributions. In my speech, I will try to cover the points they have raised.

The hon. Member for Henley and Thame is right to highlight the fact that there can be particular challenges in designing safe routes for cyclists in rural areas. There are many country lanes and B roads where the national speed limit applies and where there is clearly no room for a separate cycle lane. Such roads can be intimidating places for all but the most experienced of cyclists, with the constant risk of being close-passed at high speeds by inconsiderate drivers. By definition, narrow country roads also tend to have far less room on them than wide urban streets, where a segregated cycle lane can offer cyclists protection from other road users.

There has also perhaps been a perception, rightly or wrongly, that successive Governments of whatever colour have only really been interested in promoting active travel in urban areas, and have tended to ignore the very different needs of rural areas. I can assure the hon. Member for Henley and Thame, however, that this Government are determined to ensure that active travel—whether walking, wheeling or cycling—can address the transport needs of people in both urban and rural communities. I will come on to the different ways in which we intend to do so in a few moments, but let me first set out the broader context.

As we all know, active travel is a great way of improving people’s health that can in turn ease pressure on our NHS. It has other benefits, including supporting economic growth, reducing congestion and helping to decarbonise transport. All of this matters just as much in rural areas as it does in our towns and cities.

Funding for decent infrastructure is critical. In the Budget, the Government underlined our commitment to active travel by announcing an additional £100 million of capital funding for active travel infrastructure in the financial year 2025-26. That reversed the previous Government’s funding reduction.

In the very near future, Active Travel England will announce further details of the Government’s investment plans for this year and next. I am confident that some of that investment will enable the delivery of high-quality active travel infrastructure in rural areas. However, I am afraid that the hon. Member for Henley and Thame will have to wait just a little bit longer to hear further details on that.

The Government will then set out what further funding for active travel will be available in future years, following the spending review. We will do so alongside producing a new cycling and walking investment strategy, which we anticipate will be published next year.

Wherever cycling infrastructure is built, it must be delivered to the right standard. In particular, it should comply with the Department’s cycling infrastructure design guidance. Active Travel England provides training to local authority officers across the country on how best to design safe and accessible cycling and walking infrastructure, and it is developing specific guidance for the application of good practice in rural areas.

The Minister has moved on to the “how”, but I wonder whether it is worth reflecting for slightly longer on the “why”. With my Chair of the Health and Social Care Committee hat on, I wonder whether he noted that the chief medical officer’s annual report last year on an ageing society mentioned cycling 13 times, in the context of meeting the needs of an ageing population. He might also have noted that rural areas age faster than urban areas because of demographic shifts. And he might also have noted that in the 2022 annual report, cycling was mentioned 88 times in the context of air pollution.

I note that the Government’s life mission is for people to live “well for longer.” To what extent is the Minister’s Department planning to be part of the delivery of that mission, and how is he making that happen?

I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. I can assure her that the Department for Transport is working closely with Departments across Government; we want to break down the silos of Departments and work on our collective missions. I have already had discussions with the Department of Health and Social Care and Sir Chris Whitty regarding our contribution, and I will continue to have such discussions. I absolutely recognise that active travel can be fundamental when it comes to tackling people’s health issues and to removing barriers to opportunity and economic growth.

Ensuring that infrastructure is safe must be our overriding concern. Over 60% of respondents to the Department for Transport’s national travel attitudes survey said that safer roads would encourage them to cycle more. As I have said, rural roads can be more dangerous for cyclists, because there is faster-moving traffic and no space for segregated cycle lanes. That is why supporting local authorities to design and deliver high-quality active travel infrastructure that is safe and compliant with the relevant design standards is a key part of Active Travel England’s remit. It is also why funding provided by the Department for Transport for walking and cycling schemes comes with the clear requirement to comply with relevant design standards.

As the hon. Member for Henley and Thame may be aware, Oxfordshire county council has been successful in securing funding for active travel schemes in a number of rural areas. That includes nearly £1.5 million for a scheme in Abingdon and nearly £2 million for a scheme in Witney. The scheme in Abingdon will create a safe walking, wheeling and cycling route, providing new crossings and other improvements to overcome a significant barrier to active travel between Oxford and Abingdon, and onwards to Didcot and beyond.

Another example of a new scheme, which opened in the last few weeks, is in Wycombe, just across the county border from the constituency of the hon. Member. Buckinghamshire council completed an Active Travel England-funded improved pathway to support walking, wheeling, cycling and horse riding in Keep Hill wood, near High Wycombe.

The money for all these schemes has come from various dedicated pots of funding for active travel that have been announced by Active Travel England in recent years. In total, almost £650 million of funding has been provided for local authority infrastructure since covid. In addition, Active Travel England has worked with National Parks England to provide £1 million funding to allow the 10 national park authorities in England to develop inclusive active travel plans, as well as supporting activities, such as scheme planning and design, and how best to make sure local stakeholders are engaged. All 10 projects are due to be completed by next summer. I gather, too, that there was a petition last year concerning a proposed off-road cycle route in the hon. Member’s constituency. If they have not already done so already, I encourage representatives from Oxfordshire county council to contact Active Travel England about that scheme if it is a viable possibility.

I will try to address some points made by hon. Members. As I said, Active Travel England provided £1 million grant funding to national parks, and is currently working on guidance for authorities on how to design and build safe infrastructure for walking, wheeling and cycling in rural areas, including villages and market towns. We expect publication in late 2025. Active Travel England is currently engaging with stakeholder groups to support that work, including both potential route users such as Disabled Ramblers, Cycling UK, the British Horse Society and so on, and guidance users including local authorities, Highways England and bodies such as the National Trust and national parks.

I will conclude by saying a big thank you again to all Members who contributed and to the hon. Member for Henley and Thame for raising this important issue. I look forward to continuing to work with him—I thank him for his offer to work on a cross-party basis towards achieving our active travel ambitions—and all other hon. Members to enable more people to choose to walk, wheel and cycle, irrespective of where they live.

Thank you, Ms Vaz, for calling me again. I thank all hon. Members for their contributions.

A number of issues were touched on, but I would like to zoom in on speed limits. My constituency has done an excellent job of embracing lower speed limits. Villages had the opportunity, under an innovative scheme run by the county council, to reduce speeds to 20 mph on many rural roads. That has had a really positive impact, with Oxfordshire seeing the largest reduction in collisions in the whole country. Research shows that a 1 mph reduction leads to a 6% reduction in collisions. Not everybody drives to the speed limit. As I tell my residents, if we set the expectation that everyone drives at 19.9 mph then we will see the scheme as a failure, but for the most part residents are law-abiding and respect the speed limit, and that has had tremendous benefits.

Several hon. Members spoke on the importance of bottom-up planning and not having a one-size-fits-all approach. Rural areas are unique and different—they are not all the same. Off-road infrastructure along canal paths and former railways, or the introduction of quiet lanes using existing road infrastructure, is all extremely valuable.

Some Members spoke about the importance of maintaining roads for all road users, whether vehicular or active travel. The previous Government left a £16 billion backlog in road maintenance. In my county, officers inform me that they receive only £15 million a year for highway maintenance, but that it costs the county upwards of £45 million to keep roads safe and that residents would only see meaningful benefit if there was an increase to £80 million. The Minister spoke about investment in active travel in terms of millions; I would like to see him shift his vernacular from “m” to “b” and see billions of pounds invested over a number of years.

Members spoke about the importance of inclusivity. That is particularly important to me, having learned how communities approach cycling in the Netherlands. There, you will see people cycling in a leisurely way and carting all sorts of things. An approach where we have more children, more women, more vulnerable people and even disabled people taking part in cycling would be a fantastic culture shift in the UK. When I was living in the Netherlands, I would even cycle 50 metres to the nearest post box from my house. That is the kind of culture shift I hope we can achieve, in both urban and rural settings.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered cycling infrastructure in rural areas