Oral Answers to Questions

Clive Jones Excerpts

Thursday 16th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

If this summer’s free bus travel scheme for under-15s proves successful, will the Minister look to extend it for the future? It would help hard-working families in Wokingham make the most of their holiday period.

[Simon Lightwood]

The Labour party is keeping bus fares low. We introduced the £3 bus fare cap, after the previous Government failed to fund any support when the previous cap expired. Beyond March next year, we will continue to keep our options open, in order to make sure that bus travel is safe, accessible and affordable for everyone.

Oral Answers to Questions

Clive Jones Excerpts

Thursday 11th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

It is sometimes essential to do maintenance work over the weekends, and I appreciate that that can cause disruption to the travelling public. We try to keep that at a minimum and properly communicate with passengers in advance so they can plan their journeys accordingly. We would not be financially able to provide direct compensation at the current time, but I want to minimise the disruption that the hon. Gentleman’s constituents and the travelling public across the country experience on those occasions.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

The Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety has outlined the potential benefits of changing default speed limits on urban and rural minor roads to 20 mph. What is the Department’s position on that, and will it be reflected in the next guidance for local transport authorities on setting local speed limits?

[Heidi Alexander]

Decisions about speed limits on local roads are matters for the local highway authority. I think that that is right, because local leaders will know their areas best. I am also acutely aware that if someone is hit by a car travelling at 20 mph, they are five times less likely to die than if they are hit by one travelling at 30 mph. Appropriate decisions need to be taken by the appropriate authority for local circumstances.

Oral Answers to Questions

Clive Jones Excerpts

Thursday 26th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Simon Lightwood]

It is absolute nonsense from the Opposition. Let me tell the House what this Government have done compared with the complete inaction of the previous Government. We are changing the booking service to allow only learner drivers to book and manage their tests. We are introducing a limit on the number of times that learner drivers can move or swap their test to twice, and are making use of the Ministry of Defence to drive up the number of tests available.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

4. What assessment her Department has made of the effectiveness of Government funding for repairing potholes.

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

This Labour Government are providing £7.3 billion for highways maintenance over four years, doubling the funding provided by the previous Government by the end of this Parliament. Our long-term funding approach is already reaping results, with 15% more pothole prevention works carried out in 2025 compared with 2024. Effectiveness is monitored through annual transparency reports, incentive funding requirements and the new traffic light ratings system, ensuring that funding is used to deliver lasting, visible improvements for road users.

[Clive Jones]

Wokingham borough council is the lowest funded unitary authority. Between 2020 and 2022 when the Conservatives led the council, they cut the road maintenance budget by £2 million, although they seem to have no recollection of doing so. Now the Labour Government are cutting £43 million from the council’s funding for the next three years. What steps is the Minister taking to provide councils like Wokingham with the funding they need to maintain safe roads, despite being drained of cash by the Government?

[Simon Lightwood]

I am afraid that I do not recognise the hon. Gentleman’s numbers. Capital funding for highways maintenance has not been cut in Wokingham. Wokingham borough council is eligible to receive £28.9 million over the next four years as part of the £7.3 billion investment. That represents a clear year-on-year increase from 2024-25 to 2025-26, with funding due to continue to increase over the next four years.

Oral Answers to Questions

Clive Jones Excerpts

Thursday 12th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Lilian Greenwood]

I thank my hon. Friend for his important question. There is no doubt that we need to ensure that transport systems work better together. I am sure he will be very interested in our forthcoming integrated national transport strategy, and he does not have too long to wait.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

12. What assessment she has made of the effectiveness of funding for road maintenance.

[The Secretary of State for Transport (Heidi Alexander)]

Proper investment in maintaining our roads saves drivers shelling out hundreds of pounds for pothole-related repairs and makes journeys safer and smoother for millions of people every day. That is why we are investing a record £7.3 billion over the next four years to help councils maintain roads, and it is why we have introduced a transparency system to ensure that local people can see that their councils spend this money effectively.

[Clive Jones]

The funding given to local authorities is woefully inadequate to maintain the roads, let alone improve them. While Department for Transport funding remains well below historical levels in real terms, local authorities such as Wokingham have also had their funding dramatically cut by the Government. How do the Government expect local authorities like Wokingham to deliver on the objectives of the new road safety strategy?

[Heidi Alexander]

It is sadly a fact that we have seen a decade of under-investment in our road network. This Government are putting record money into local councils —£1.6 billion this year, which is £500 million more than the year before—and we will be doubling the amount of money spent on local road maintenance over the course of this Parliament. The hon. Member raises an important point about the importance of road surface and highways maintenance to road safety, and that is why we are putting our money where our mouth is.

Oral Answers to Questions

Clive Jones Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

The Office of Rail and Road’s decision with respect to unused capacity at Temple Mills was very welcome. We need to explore whether there are ways to increase depot capacity further, and my hon. Friend will be aware that there are a whole series of further steps that we need to go through before passenger services are live and running. I am really keen that we make use of the spare capacity that exists in the channel tunnel to improve and increase the number of direct international rail services that run from London.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

T5. Hundreds of residents scramble to Twyford train station in my constituency every morning to get to work either in London or in other nearby towns. The village has become overwhelmed, with many struggling to find somewhere to park. Will the Minister meet me to update me on plans for improving local travel links to help residents to access new services such as the Elizabeth line, and even a rail link to Heathrow?

[Heidi Alexander]

I would be happy to ask the Rail Minister to meet the hon. Gentleman to talk about the particular issues around the station that he mentions and to understand what more we could do to properly integrate transport options in that area.

Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Clive Jones Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 10th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I had the pleasure of serving on the Bill Committee, and I am pleased to see the Bill back before the House. Although it does good work, it simply does not go far enough in its ambition or its delivery of the change we need—that is apparent from the number of amendments tabled on Report.

One of the really important amendments for me is new clause 12, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler). I spent the final week in August visiting dozens of North Norfolk’s villages as part of my summer tour. I heard about a huge range of issues, but a consistent theme across my area was frustration with our buses. Shirley and David in Hindringham told me that two buses a day just is not enough to get them to the places they need to go at the times they want to get there. They are right: that is indicative of a system that serves nobody in rural areas like mine.

It is not just anecdotes that back up that feeling; the numbers do, too. Those of us in the east of England get less than half the spend per head on transport as those in London. We accept that the transport system in our capital is different and that, overall, more money ends up being needed to accommodate the millions who need it, but to spend on each individual Londoner more than double the amount that is spent on my residents is patently unfair—and that is before we consider the advantage that urban areas have. They are set up for carrying out public transport. Running a bus network through a busy, well-populated area will always be easier and cheaper per head than having to dart around country lanes, picking up at small villages a handful of times a day.

I am excited about the prospect of franchising, which could bring real benefits to Norfolk’s bus services. However, rural areas like mine are embarking on the unknown. Franchising has a track record in big cities such as Manchester and London, but how we make it work in other areas with different characteristics remains unknown. That is why new clause 12 is so important. We should not be prescriptive, and nobody wants to force areas into pre-designed templates, but we have to offer them suitable support and off-the-shelf models so that they do not go through it totally alone.

As the Transport Committee, of which I am a member, found in its “Buses connecting communities” inquiry, there is a lot to learn from elsewhere when it comes to running successful bus networks, especially in rural areas. Without providing some of that knowledge in the form of clearly researched and defined transport model options, I worry that we are setting up another postcode lottery, whereby the quality of how these new powers are used depends on whether a transport authority got lucky in trying to make a new scheme work.

I spoke in Committee about how one such model should be a rural bus hub-and-spoke network, which would give the most coverage possible to as many areas as possible. Trying to reach every single village all the time just is not feasible, and we have to accept that. What is feasible is making sure that every village is near to a rural bus hub that is accessible through walking, cycling or a short drive. These hubs, if connected to one another, will finally create a rural network. We have to start challenging old ideas about how rural public transport works, and to be bold in the solutions we take forward.

I am very supportive of new clause 2, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon). To its credit, Norfolk county council has voluntarily expanded the times when people can use a disability bus pass, and I have heard positive testimony of how this has helped many people in my area. People across the country should be able to benefit from that equally, so I hope the Government will support new clause 2 tonight.

I make no apology for constantly banging on about buses. It cannot be beyond us to build a rural bus network that takes people where they want to go, when they want to go there. I welcome the steps that the Government are taking, but I urge them to seize the opportunity before them. They should not let this Bill go through as an unfunded damp squib that creates some new powers, with no help in their delivery. I hope they will take the suggestions of Members on board tonight, and make this the best possible Bill to drive forward the much-needed rural bus revolution.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

I will speak to new clauses 1 and 2, and amendment 9. This Government are giving more powers to local authorities, such as the franchising of local bus services. They expect councils to fund more bus services, while they undermine and reduce councils’ core funding at the same time. Our amendment 3 would require the Secretary of State to assess the adequacy of central Government funding to support franchise schemes. That is essential because, due to the pandemic, bus service usage massively declined in my constituency of Wokingham.

Since then, the Lib Dem-run council has acted to improve local bus services, increasing the frequency of services on key routes. It is now predicted that bus services in Wokingham will recover to pre-pandemic rates. The Lib Dem-run council has done that despite being one of the lowest-funded unitary authorities in the country, but Labour’s new council funding formula will take £47 million away from Wokingham over the next three years. How can the Labour Government expect councils such as Wokingham to improve services and take on the responsibilities created by this Bill without proper support from Government, as is called for in amendment 3?

I wholeheartedly support new clause 2, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon), which proposes that time restrictions be removed from disabled people’s concessionary passes. That would be widely welcomed by many of my constituents.

I also support new clause 1, tabled by the Liberal Democrats, which would restore the £2 fare cap. That would help younger and older constituents in my Wokingham constituency.

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

There is a lot to welcome in the Bill, and I support the overarching aim. However, there are several important details that very much concern small operators and community transport providers in my Witney constituency, and I shall speak on their behalf. They include West Oxfordshire Community Transport, including Andrew Coles, Andrew Lyon and their team, and David Miles and Amanda, who have done so much to get the First & Last Mile moving.

My fear is that the franchising frameworks and new training requirements stipulated in the Bill will squeeze out community operators and that the social and economic cost will be severe, particularly in rural areas where mainstream operators have withdrawn. Section 22 community bus permit holders, who provide transport on a not-for-profit basis without the need for a full public service vehicle operator licence, ensure a service in communities that would otherwise be completely unserved. The Bill currently does not recognise this category at all. That raises a couple of worries.

One particular worry is that the new driver safeguarding and training requirements could become unworkable for small fleets. The Bill’s provisions do not clearly differentiate between private hire vehicles—dedicated school buses—and public service buses which may sometimes carry schoolchildren as part of the general route. In practice, that means that every driver would need full safeguarding training, regardless of the service they normally operate.

Pavement Parking

Clive Jones Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) for organising the debate. It is wholly unacceptable that the Conservative Government dragged their heels on this important issue. They dithered and delayed because they could not make up their mind what they needed to do. As a result, pedestrians are put at risk every day by inconsiderate parking and local councils incur significant costs repairing kerbs and verges damaged by drivers.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

On exactly that issue, I represent the city of Wells, which has wonderful, beautiful streets, but when delivery vehicles park on the pavements, they break the paving slabs. That makes it an absolute peril for people who have accessibility problems and are less mobile. Does my hon. Friend agree that that has to be dealt with soon, otherwise groups such as Accessible Wells, which I am meant to meet tomorrow, will not have—

Waterloo-Reading Line: Class 701 Trains

Clive Jones Excerpts

Tuesday 1st July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Dawn Butler (in the Chair)]

I will call Clive Jones to move the motion and then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members—one Member—that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for a 30-minute debate.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the introduction of Class 701 trains on the Waterloo-Reading line.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I am honoured to have secured this debate on a matter close to the hearts and frayed nerves of many in my Wokingham constituency.

Imagine, Ms Butler, that you are one of my constituents commuting to London or Reading. You spot your train on the horizon—the all-too-familiar blue face and red shell of the class 455 train, built in 1983 and rattling along for 42 years. That sight will produce an inevitable sigh of despair from all at the train station: it will not be a comfortable journey. Hon. Members might wonder what is so bad about that rolling relic. For starters, on a day like today, when we have 34 degrees of heat, if they step inside the train, they will be treated to a delightful 45°C sauna, courtesy of no air conditioning and poor ventilation.

Despite the journey from Wokingham to Waterloo taking an hour and 12 minutes, there are no toilet facilities on board. Speed restrictions apply exclusively to the 455 on the Waterloo to Reading route, which means slower journeys and greater delays. That is why the class 455 is being replaced by the new, sleek class 701, also known as the Arterio. The Arterio train will mean air conditioning, real-time passenger information, more seating and actual toilets. However, the journey to introduce the new trains has encountered unacceptable delays, setbacks and uncertainty that go unresolved to this very day, despite the fact that they were promised nearly eight years ago.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Many feel that the railway services in Yeovil are not good enough. Does my hon. Friend agree that in rural areas we need to replace the old trains that we rely on, some of which are more than 40 years old—a lot older than I am—and improve access and staffing at railway stations so that constituents with disabilities can use trains in a safe manner?

[Clive Jones]

I completely agree with my hon. Friend; we do need to improve rolling stock. Part of our problem on the South Western Railway line, Wokingham to Waterloo, is that it is old rolling stock, which is what this debate is about. He also mentioned better access for disabled people, and I 100% agree that that is absolutely needed.

Although I am aware of a few Arterio trains running on the South Western Railway network, that is still not the case on the Waterloo to Reading line, which my constituents use every day. Numerous promises have been made by South Western Railway and the Department for Transport, but almost all of them have been broken. In 2019, the Department for Transport claimed that in the coming months new trains would be introduced on the South Western Railway network, but what has happened? Nothing. In 2020, the Arterio was destined to be first rolled out on the Waterloo to Reading line. In 2022, the South Western Railway business plan stated that SWR would

“introduce the new Arterio fleet as soon as possible”.

Two years ago, the Department for Transport stated that the trains would be in service as soon as possible in 2023. Last year, SWR stated that the roll-out of the full fleet would take up to 18 months from January 2024, and I was informed that the trains would be ready for me to travel in to Parliament by June 2025. Now, in 2025, SWR still does not have a final timeline for when my constituents will get to benefit from the new trains. Every year promises have been made, and every year promises have been broken.

With SWR nationalised, the Department for Transport must scrutinise the project relentlessly until it is properly delivered. I ask the Minister: when will the Arterio trains be in service on the Waterloo to Reading line? I would also be grateful if he would set out in detail what steps are being taken to ensure that the Department for Transport does not allow the delays to be extended any further.

I remind Members that the previous Conservative Government were completely complacent on this matter. No contractual penalties were imposed on the owning company of SWR, despite its failure to deliver with taxpayers’ cash. Did the Department for Transport consider imposing penalties when Labour was elected in July 2024? If not, why not?

On 9 June 2025, in response to a written parliamentary question tabled on 30 May 2025, the Minister stated:

“The new Managing Director of SWR is now developing a detailed plan”

for introducing the Arterio fleet. Did such a plan not exist under the previous, privatised version of SWR? When can we expect the plan to be completed, and will it be available for scrutiny by Members of this House? Finally, will the Minister extend an invitation from me to meet the Minister of State for Rail to discuss these issues in more detail?

Oral Answers to Questions

Clive Jones Excerpts

Thursday 26th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Simon Lightwood]

I will expect the hon. Gentleman to walk through the Lobby with the Government when our Bus Services (No. 2) Bill comes forward. It is exactly designed to take back control of our bus services, which the Conservative party completely and spectacularly failed to do.

The Bill will empower local leaders to choose a model that works best for their area. It includes, as I mentioned, a socially necessary local services measure. Local transport authorities that operate under an enhanced partnership will be required to identify local services that they consider to be socially necessary and put in place requirements that must be followed before such services can be changed or cancelled. They also need to consider the alternative options available to them.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

Bus usage and services in rural and semi-rural areas such as Wokingham were particularly hard hit during the pandemic. Will the Minister confirm that councils such as Wokingham will not see funding for local bus services reduced, and will he recognise that rebuilding bus usage in rural areas is a unique challenge that requires extra resources?

[Simon Lightwood]

I completely understand the challenges, particularly in rural areas. That is why the package of measures in the Bill to give local areas the powers that they need to take control of those buses is so important. I already mentioned socially necessary bus routes. In the Budget, we confirmed £1 billion in support to improve bus services and keep fares affordable, including in rural areas. That funding has been devolved down to local leaders to decide how to spend that in any way they see fit. That will improve bus services in their area, including in rural areas.

Oral Answers to Questions

Clive Jones Excerpts

Thursday 27th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Simon Lightwood]

The Government agree that everyone should have the opportunity to walk or cycle, whatever their background, and we will obviously study the contents of the report in detail, which correctly highlights some of the ways in which cycle to work schemes, for example, might be reformed. The Government agree that adapted cycles, which are included in the report, also play an important role in providing freedom and independence.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

The root cause of the pothole problem is councils’ inability to afford to resurface roads. Wokingham borough council saw no uplift in resurface funding for many years, with no account taken of inflation or new roads. This is a legacy of the Conservative party in government, leading to maintenance funding per mile effectively being halved. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the urgent need for funding for resurfacing of new roads?

[Lilian Greenwood]

I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman’s local council has suffered the same fate as councils across the country as a result of the under-investment in local roads maintenance under the previous Government, but they will now have benefited from their share of our £500 million uplift for the year ahead, and they are absolutely encouraged to use that to resurface the roads and fix potholes.