Railways Bill

Helen Morgan Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 9th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)]

I thank those who have put so much work into the Bill, which has had a long gestation, with its roots in the multiple timetable change meltdowns across the network in May 2018. They and the Government are right to recognise that our railways need change. That should be our starting point.

I will start with the reasons why we need that change. Unfortunately, the British Railways Act 1994 framework introduced by the Conservative Government of that era has certainly been full of problems, and previous Conservative Governments have presided over above-inflation fare increases, overcrowded trains and frankly incomprehensible and totally baffling contract extensions awarded to failing train operators such as CrossCountry and Avanti West Coast. I think we can all agree in this House that the current structure and system is not putting passengers or freight users first, but we should also recognise that meddling and interference from central Government has increased since the pandemic and is at the heart of some of our problems—more of which anon.

Let us start with what is good about the Bill. It is certainly an honest and serious attempt to simplify the current convoluted industry structure and processes. It is quite right to focus on the need for accessibility improvements, and it is welcome that it introduces the idea of a long-term rail strategy, although the usefulness of that will depend on how “long-term” is defined. The creation of a passenger standards authority to build on the work of Transport Focus is welcome to ensure that the passenger really is put first.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

In constituencies such as North Shropshire, where access to the railway is very poor indeed, we have initiatives for step-free access at Whitchurch station and to connect Oswestry, which is the second largest town in Shropshire but has no rail connection, to the line at Gobowen. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Bill really needs to take up those types of opportunities? Otherwise, many people will fail to recognise the benefits of hopefully improving the rail system.

Rural Railway Stations: Step Free Access

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Tuesday 11th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

I will call Helen Morgan to move the motion; I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. As is the convention in 30-minute debates, there will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the matter of step free access at rural railway stations.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner.

In constituencies such as North Shropshire, access to public transport is poor. There are just three fully operational railway stations in North Shropshire, along with two very rural request stops. Shropshire’s second and third largest towns do not have a station at all. Whitchurch, home to around 10,000 people, does not have step-free access from the southbound platform. The station is a vital hub, particularly for the eastern side of the constituency and for those needing to connect with west coast main line services at Crewe or on to Chester or Manchester and southward to Shrewsbury, Birmingham and Wales. This has been an issue for a very long time. Every time I go out and knock on doors in Whitchurch, inadequate access to the railway is brought up by countless people.

Residents of Whitchurch who want to access the southbound platform to travel down to the county town of Shrewsbury or to exit the station when travelling down from the north are forced to tackle 44 steps up and down a footbridge. Those who are disabled or elderly, in a wheelchair or with heavy bikes, prams or large suitcases are often physically unable to access half of the trains going out of the station, or exit the station into the town when coming in from the north.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

I completely agree with my hon. Friend about the challenges that train users face when they have mobility issues. In my own constituency, for example, someone can come back from town into Bredbury but not get into town from Bredbury. Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a broader point about staffing? If the gap between the train and the platform is such that someone needs a staff member to help with the ramp, does she agree that there is an infrastructure and a staffing issue to address so that people can access our railways completely?

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

Order. I ask for interventions to be short, please.

[Helen Morgan]

I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. She raises a good point because none of the stations in my constituency is staffed on a regular basis, which adds an extra dimension for people struggling with their mobility or carrying heavy items.

The nearest alternative stations in Shropshire are Prees and Wrenbury. Both are request stops, where we have to stand on the edge of the platform and hail the train for it to stop. They are six and seven miles away respectively. To get from Whitchurch to Prees, which is southward—the way someone wants to go if they cannot access the platform—a person must travel over an hour by walking and taking the bus if they do not have a car. There is not an alternative option to get to Wrenbury. There is no parking at Prees station—just a widening in the grass verge by the road.

One Whitchurch resident told me that 10 years ago, sadly, they developed a neurological condition, which led to their retiring from their profession and needing to use a four-wheeled walking frame. They had to make frequent trips to the national hospital for neurology and neurosurgery in London, but were not able to use Whitchurch station. Instead they had to drive over 17 miles along a poorly maintained road to Crewe to access the station there. It is absurd that we must have a car to access the railway. Public transport is for people who do not have cars. The nation and the Government are trying to move towards more sustainable forms of travel, but preventing large numbers of people from using the railway will not help achieve that objective.

Nearly two years after I first wrote to the Department for Transport, shortly after I was elected, and after countless letters, questions and meetings, Whitchurch station was finally announced as one of the stations where feasibility work for a step-free solution would be carried out under the Access for All scheme in May 2024, shortly before the election. As one would expect, the announcement gave rise to hope in the town that work would finally be completed, and yet what followed was a chaotic confusion of mixed messages.

Shortly after the general election the new Labour Government indicated that they would pause the projects while they sorted out the nation’s finances. Over a year later, a press release identical to the May 2024 one was published by the Government, stating that feasibility studies had been given the green light, further adding to the confusion about the timeline for the work. In August, Lord Hendy then confirmed that the initial feasibility studies had been completed, and that a decision would be made on which of the 50 stations would be put forward for work to start in the context of the spending review 2025, which took place in July.

Almost two months later, we are still waiting to learn the Department’s decision. The Government’s answers to pleas from Members across the House for approved stations to finally be released have made full use of the phrases “will be announced in due course” and “will be announced shortly”, but there has been nothing in the way of clarity, either in terms of the timetable or the stations to be included.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

Wivelsfield station in my constituency was also promised money in January 2024 under the Access for All scheme, and to date no more information has been forthcoming. Does my hon. Friend agree that what the Conservatives did in 2024 was nothing more than pork barrel politics?

[Helen Morgan]

My hon. Friend makes a good point. I think there is an element of pork barrel politics and of making undeliverable promises shortly before the election. That is not forgivable, because it has created an expectation among constituents that cannot be fulfilled.

As I was saying, the lack of clarity has added to the frustration of residents in places such as Whitchurch—especially in Whitchurch, because the plans for the lift are in place. It has been designed and Network Rail is keen to start work on the project, having designated it as a high priority for delivery in control period 7. All we need for step-free access at Whitchurch is a green light from the Department for Transport. I would be grateful if the Minister set out the Government’s timeline for delivering step-free access to Whitchurch station, so I may share that with my constituents.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

I share my hon. Friend’s frustration but would like to say what a luxury it is to be so far down the line with an Access for All bid. Despite having £100,000 pledged by Dorset council and local developers to support step-free access, Dorchester South station is still waiting to hear whether it will even be considered for the bid. Does she agree that more should be done to create transparency in this process?

[Helen Morgan]

My hon. Friend is right: there should be more transparency, but there also needs to be more attention to the issue of step-free access in rural areas. I am about to come on to that in more detail.

Improving the accessibility of Whitchurch station will bring more people to the town via rail. That obviously could boost tourism—Whitchurch is Shropshire’s oldest continuously occupied town and is well worth a visit, along with the other beautiful and historic towns in my constituency—and bring customers to local businesses, workers to job vacancies, critically, and families to their loved ones.

Rural towns and villages have been consistently deprioritised by successive Governments and this Government, I am afraid, are no better, continually focusing investment into mayoral combined authorities’ coffers. Those areas do not face the same fundamental issues that rural areas do. They have regular buses that come within minutes, even on Sundays, and train services that are more frequent than every two hours. If people choose to drive, they can do so without the risk of damaging their tyres because they have bumped into a huge pothole. In a town like Whitchurch, if the bus turns up the round trip to someone’s destination is likely to be more than two hours—even if it is only to Shrewsbury, which is 20 miles away. Investment like the Access for All scheme in rural areas is part of the solution to improving economic growth—to more businesses thriving, more people spending and more money flowing into our economy.

[Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)]

What the hon. Lady is describing sounds very familiar to the market town of Baldock in my constituency of North East Hertfordshire. Baldock is due to double in size, but does not have any step-free access. Would she join me in urging the Minister to ensure that rapidly growing rural communities receive a fair share of infrastructure funding?

[Helen Morgan]

The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. Whitchurch, like, I would imagine, many of the towns mentioned in today’s debate, has seen a huge amount of development. The criteria that might have been applied for step-free access some years back probably need reassessing now, because far more people are living there.

The investment would help revitalise our market town high streets, which have withered after years of the previous Conservative Government’s taking rural areas for granted. This Labour Government need to acknowledge the importance of rural parts of the country because they risk pushing the urban-rural divide to breaking point. I welcome the £373 million scheme to deliver Access for All projects over the next five years on a £70 million annual rolling basis, but it is key that that money is distributed to places where access to the railway network is currently poor and where it will have the most impact.

The only criteria that we could find for the provision of step-free access to railway stations come from joint code of practice created by the Department for Transport and Transport Scotland in 2015—a decade ago. It recommends that

“stations that have a daily passenger flow of 1000 passengers or less…are not required to have lifts or ramps”

if a station within 50 km of the same route provides a step-free route. I am sorry, but once someone has got in their car and driven 30 miles to access a step-free station, they may as well drive the rest of the way—I certainly would; that completely negates the point of public transport. Will the Minister please set out whether his Department intends to update those outdated and ineffective criteria to ensure that rural areas are not left forever without accessible stations?

Of course, I understand that installing accessibility upgrades for urban stations may reach more people, but the people there already have other forms of accessible transport, often as well as a usable taxi service. In an area such as Shropshire, that is often not the case. If the Government want to achieve their mission of stimulating growth across the whole country, they should ensure that everyone has proper access to public transport, not just those people who are lucky enough to live in an urban area. I hope that the Minister will ensure that the needs of our rural areas are understood and prioritised to turn the tide on decades of persistent under-investment in public transport and take the first step to making the railway step-free in rural areas, and especially in Whitchurch in North Shropshire.

--- Later in debate ---

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

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Turner.

It is a privilege to respond to this important debate on rail accessibility in rural areas, which plays a vital role in opening up our railway to people who do not happen to live in towns and cities, regardless of their mobility, their age or the fact that they are travelling with heavy luggage. Accessibility is a core priority for this Government and will continue to be for Great British Railways. We are committed to delivering a rail system that allows disabled people and others who might need assistance to travel easily, confidently and with dignity; of course, this applies equally to those living in rural areas.

We know that too often disabled people’s experience of travelling by rail falls short of what is expected and what passengers deserve. We are not waiting for GBR to be established to deliver improvements to facilities and to the passenger experience. Our short to medium-term ambitions are set out in the accessible rail road map, which we published last week alongside the Railways Bill. The road map includes a wide range of accessibility improvements across seven priority areas, such as station and train accessibility, consistency and reliability of both assets and information, ticket retailing, monitoring, culture and training. The road map also announced that eligibility for the disabled persons railcard will be extended in two phases next year. This will make the application process simpler and reflect a more comprehensive understanding of the diverse barriers that disabled people face when travelling.

The accessible rail road map is a practical transitional plan focused on delivering immediate improvements to accessibility, while laying the foundations for longer-term transformation under GBR. It is the beginning rather than the end of delivering a more accessible railway for the future. I thank the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) for her ongoing work in making the case for improved accessibility in rural areas, particularly in her own constituency, which I will address in the course of my remarks.

The Government remain fully committed to improving accessibility across our rail network. Like Members in all parts of the House, we recognise the significant social and economic benefits that accessible transport brings to individuals, families and of course communities. Through the Access for All programme, we have already delivered step-free access to more than 270 stations right across Britain. This work has included providing lift installations, ramps, tactile paving, improved signage and wayfinding changes, all of which make a real difference in the everyday lives of passengers. Smaller-scale accessibility upgrades have also been completed at more than 1,500 locations. This work has included providing everything from accessible ticket machines to better lighting, handrails and help points. That is real progress. We are making strides to transform journeys for passengers who previously struggled to use the railway, or were unable to use it at all. We are also continuing to invest in improving station accessibility. As part of the 2025 spending review, the Chancellor confirmed £280 million for Access for All projects over a four-year period.

I now turn to the specific topic of this debate: accessibility at rural stations. Like all taxpayer-funded programmes, Access for All needs to demonstrate value for money. Funding is therefore targeted at the busiest stations to benefit the maximum number of people. Consequently, stations in rural areas that are used by fewer people are unlikely to be prioritised for accessibility upgrades, although I should also make it clear that that is equally applicable to stations in towns and cities that are less used than other stations.

It might be helpful to our understanding of the issues around accessibility in rural areas to reflect on the accessibility of stations in the North Shropshire constituency, which is a largely rural area. On a positive note, I think that Prees, Gobowen and Wem railway stations in her constituency already provide step-free access to all platforms. All three of these stations are categorised as B1, which means that step-free access is provided to all platforms, albeit it might be via a steep ramp. In the case of Gobowen—I checked the pronunciation beforehand, but still cannot manage it; apologies to constituents there—and Wem, I am aware that access can also require the use of level crossings. If a passenger arrives when the barrier is down, they might not be able to reach their platform in time to catch the train.

[Helen Morgan]

I want to re-emphasise the point that to a person who lives in Whitchurch, Gobowen is a long way away; they have to drive there. There is no parking at Prees. It is in the middle of nowhere—literally, because the station is not in the village. At Wem, the barrier is down for seven minutes when a train comes in; it is really inaccessible. Although fewer people use those stations, they have fewer options for public transport. I wonder whether the criteria are the right ones.

[Simon Lightwood]

I am reminded that Cumberland is one of our bus franchising pilot areas. So far, from just looking at our city regions as discussed earlier, we are investing money in those franchising pilots to ensure that the major improvements promised under the Bus Services Act 2025 can also be realised in more rural areas.

Passengers’ access to parts of the railway via level crossings is an extensive feature of rural railways across Britain, and while we would all like to see a world where that is not the case, I regret that such changes will take many years to achieve. For now, it is important for passengers to plan their journeys carefully and arrive at the station in plenty of time. I also urge passengers in North Shropshire and other rural areas to make use of the railway Passenger Assist service, which allows those with mobility requirements to book assistance for their journeys from all stations, including rural ones that may not have full-time, on-site staff, as the hon. Lady mentioned.

Whitchurch station is categorised as B3, meaning step-free access is available only to one platform—platform 2, for trains to Crewe and further north. Access to platform 1, for trains to Shrewsbury and for those travelling back from the north, is via a footbridge with 44 steps. Clearly, that limits which passengers can make use of Whitchurch station.

Turning to our plans for further accessibility upgrades at railway stations across Britain, in 2022, the previous Government sought nominations for stations to benefit from upgrades as part of the Access for All programme. A total of 310 nominations were received, including for Whitchurch station. That nomination was supported strongly by the hon. Member for North Shropshire. The previous Government announced that initial feasibility work would be undertaken for 50 of those projects, and, as the hon. Lady knows, Whitchurch was one of them. I am pleased to confirm that those initial feasibility studies have now been completed. I know that she and the hon. Members representing the other 49 stations are keen to understand the next steps. I thank them for their patience while we carefully consider these important matters, and I can confirm that we plan to provide that information in the coming months.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law) for talking about Par station. The Government have invested more than £50 million in the Mid Cornwall Metro project, which is funding a new bridge and lifts. I am delighted with the progress that has been made toward delivering better accessibility across that part of Cornwall, and with the really collaborative approach taken by Network Rail, Great Western Railway and Cornwall council. Crucially, that demonstrates that there are potential funding sources other than Access for All to improve accessibility at rural stations.

During the debate, hon. Members have addressed some of the important issues and considerations around rail accessibility in rural areas. Drawing on examples in the North Shropshire constituency , we have identified challenging factors, such as the need to use level crossings for step-free access to some parts of the railway. We have also discussed stations such as Whitchurch, which, frustratingly, is only partly accessible—a legacy of the Victorian railway, which did not consider such issues.

This Government are absolutely committed to improving the accessibility of our railways, and we are in no doubt about the social and economic benefits of doing so. That is demonstrated by the £280 million that the Chancellor made available for the Access for All programme in the recent spending review. I thank the hon. Member for North Shropshire for leading this important debate, and I thank her and other right hon. and hon. Members from across the House for their patience before we announce which new Access for All projects will progress.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Thursday 11th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

We have made some progress on the proposed eastern leg of HS2, which had been due to run up to Sheffield, but the previous Government cancelled it. During the summer, I made announcements about sites on that part of the line. I am aware that there are further issues in the Birmingham area, and with the section between Birmingham and Manchester. I am keen to make progress, but we also need to make sure that we have sites available for the necessary development and construction. My first priority is to get HS2 built at the lowest reasonable cost.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

The A483 is critical to economic prosperity in mid-Wales and North Shropshire—it runs between Welshpool and Oswestry—but it has a huge accident blackspot at Llynclys in my constituency, which really holds up the traffic, and local people positively avoid the area. Highways England has said that it is keen to improve that road. Will the Secretary of State tell us the timetable for those works?

[Heidi Alexander]

I understand the point that the hon. Lady is making. If I may, I will write to her with details about that junction on the A483.

Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 10th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Marsha De Cordova]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We are encouraging people to do more active travel and to use public transport, so we need to ensure that the transport network is fully accessible and inclusive. The Minister has confirmed that an equality impact assessment will be published upon Royal Assent, and I press him again to clarify that for me.

Right now, we have a system that blind and partially sighted people say puts them at risk. It is not just me, with my own lived experience, saying that; many blind and partially sighted people say it, and the many organisations that support them have said the same. That tells me that we perhaps need to rethink floating bus stops. Indeed, if I had my way—I do not, unfortunately—I would ban them all, because they have created a challenge. None the less, we are where we are, and I am really pleased that the Government want to work to improve the situation. I welcome the fact that clause 31 seeks to address some of the challenges. My new clause 24 would place a duty on the Government to carry out an independent assessment.

I welcome the Government’s commitment on producing guidance for local services around the country in order to promote active travel, but also to ensure that disabled people can travel independently, safely and in reasonable comfort. In my view, that must be mandatory; it cannot be optional. I know the Minister has heard my concerns, and he has confirmed that that will be the case.

I also welcome the partial pause on some types of floating bus stops. As Members have said, it is so important that we address some of the safety concerns before moving to a full-scale roll-out of floating bus stops. I thank organisations such as the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association, the National Federation of the Blind, the Royal National Institute of Blind People and Transport for All, and the many blind, partially sighted and disabled people, for campaigning on this issue relentlessly to ensure that we really have a public realm that is fully accessible and fully inclusive, so that we can all benefit.

I will not push my new clauses and amendments to a vote. I fully support the Government in their endeavour, and I support this Bill.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

North Shropshire is a very rural constituency, and it is nestled in against the Welsh border, which is wiggly—I think that is the best way to describe it. That means that my constituents’ experience of using buses can be problematic, and I have tabled some new clauses that I hope the Minister will reflect on.

Shropshire is one of the worst-served counties for buses, having lost 66% of its bus miles since 2015. It has lost more bus miles, by percentage, than any other county in England. The average loss of bus miles is about 20.9%, so it has been a severe experience for my constituents. Towns such as Market Drayton have almost become isolated, because their bus service is so poor. I am sure the House has heard me say before that there is only one bus running in Shropshire on Sundays. I am lucky enough to be able to report that it runs from a town in my constituency, but it is hardly an acceptable situation for my constituents.

New clause 37 is sponsored by 30 colleagues from across the House, revealing that my constituents’ experience is shared by people in many parts of rural Britain. It tries to address the problem of poor bus services in market towns by requiring the Secretary of State to ensure that a service must be available seven days a week, and that she consults the relevant bodies to ensure that constituents using the bus service can access essential services. My Bus Services Bill, which aims to get people to hospital and other health services when they need to do so, has that requirement, but it could equally be applied to schools, colleges and other important destinations for people who find themselves isolated.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

In Bournemouth East, I am campaigning to get a better bus route to Bournemouth airport, to improve the No. 33 and to reinstate a service in Throop, where the community feel very disconnected. Does the hon. Lady agree that one benefit of this Bill is that it empowers local authorities to run their own bus companies so that they can reinstate those routes?

[Helen Morgan]

I am broadly supportive of the Bill, because I think it will do that. My point is that the power to franchise bus services is all very well, but the funding needs to follow the power. Otherwise, constituencies such as mine will not see the improvements for which they are desperate.

Colleagues have talked about the bus fare cap. I am supportive of measures to keep it at £2, but I must point out that in constituencies such as mine, which has little in the way of bus services, a cap has not made a huge difference. Some of the operators have not opted into that cap, so it has had limited impact for my constituents, important as it is.

The £1 billion fund announced by the Department for Transport last November promised to give rural and coastal areas a real sea change in their bus services, but in Shropshire—as I mentioned, it has had the worst drop-off in its services in the whole country—only £2.5 million was allocated. That is the critical point and why I am fully supportive of the Bill’s measures that will allow local authorities to decide where bus services are essential. The funding needs to follow them, regardless of whether areas are in a combined authority or have a mayor, and it should follow need, not just structure. I urge the Minister to take that on board.

Although we are not voting on new clause 37, across the House, including on the Government Benches, 30 Members have sponsored it. Many similar amendments have been tabled that likewise seek to improve bus services for people living in rural areas, and ensure they are adequate to access essential services. I urge the Minister to consider the intentions of my new clause, and those of similar amendments tabled by colleagues, and commit to some kind of improvement for rural areas when he makes his closing remarks.

I mentioned that North Shropshire is pressed up against the border with Wales and that the border with Wales is very wiggly. That gives my constituents a specific challenge with their bus passes. If they want to catch a bus between two destinations in England but it stops in Wales or they need to change in Wales, their bus pass is not valid. I think that is a bit crazy. For example, if they want to go from Oswestry to Chester and they need to change at Wrexham, their bus pass will not be valid. That is the one service that runs on a Sunday. We need to ensure that people can use their bus passes when they are crossing the border. That is a very low-cost thing, which ought to be very easy for a Government to sort out. My new clause 39 would require the Secretary of State to liaise with the Welsh Government and come up with a workable solution for what is probably an unintended consequence of devolution between England and Wales. I hope the Minister will take that on board and consider a workable solution for people using their bus passes across the border.

I also tabled new clause 40, which replicates that requirement for Scotland. I appreciate that that does not impact my constituents in North Shropshire, but I tabled it in the name of being inclusive.

I am proud to have been one of the first signatories to new clause 2, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon). I will not take any of the credit for the new clause because he has done all the hard work, but I will urge the Minister to consider accepting new clause 2 because it is so important. Disability does not stop at 9.30.

[Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Ind)]

I speak in support of the Bill and in favour of new clause 22 in my name.

We can now say in complete confidence that the privatisation and deregulation of our bus services has been a catastrophic failure for rural towns and villages such as those across North East Hertfordshire. Decades of dogmatic adherence to flawed ideology has created vast public transport deserts where residents have no meaningful alternative to driving a car. The consequent social costs of this failure have been profound: more and more traffic that stifles our communities and chokes our rivers and air with life-limiting pollution; young people cut off from education and employment, forced to leave their homes to get on in life; and our elderly trapped in loneliness and isolation, which should be a source of shame for our entire nation. The privatisation disaster means for those unable to drive or afford a car, a connected life in rural England is practically impossible.

I welcome many of the clauses in the Bill that together offer a chance to reverse the hollowing out of our villages which threatens to end centuries of cultural and economic vibrancy. We need a bus network that comprehensively meets the needs of every community, especially for rural areas that lost their train stations in the Beeching cuts, including Buntingford, Westmill, Braughing, and Standon in my constituency. That is why I have tabled new clause 22, which would empower Ministers to conduct a review into the delivery of guaranteed minimum bus service standards for every community with more than 300 residents across England.

During the progress of the Bill, I ran a survey on the experience of my constituents of their local bus services. Hundreds of residents responded and a massive, if unsurprising, 83% of them felt that the bus services available do not offer a viable alternative to owning and driving a car. As I am sure you can imagine, Madam Deputy Speaker, whether via the survey or in community meetings, my constituents have been none too shy in sharing their thoughts about the quality, reliability and general usefulness of local bus services. Consequently, it is completely clear to me that voters in North East Hertfordshire are utterly fed up with a bus network based on profitability for shareholders rather than public need. The measures in the Bill to address that with a long-overdue strengthening of socially necessary bus services are very welcome.

However, to succeed in meeting the hopes of communities such as those that I represent, we should go further and move towards a universal basic right to public transport with enshrined service standards across the country, replacing the threadbare, patchwork and inadequate network left by deregulation. Although it may be difficult to imagine, given the current state of public transport in our nation, that is, in fact, something that other countries are quite happily doing already. In Switzerland, the region of Zurich guarantees villages of 300 people or more at least an hourly bus service running seven days a week from 6 am to midnight, linking rural residents to regional facilities for employment, education, training, shopping and leisure, while North Hesse in Germany has a target of bus services reaching every village across the region every hour.

Road and Rail Projects

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Tuesday 8th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

My hon. Friend has spoken to me directly about this in the past couple of days. I know that the Rail Minister found that meeting very helpful. I appreciate that there is some strategic crossover with Defence and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, but I will be sure to stay in touch with my hon. Friend as the business case develops.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

The A483 that runs between Welshpool and Oswestry is a key economic artery for the Marches region, but like the rest of North Shropshire’s transport infrastructure, it has been seriously neglected over many years. That has left the crossroad at Llynclys in my constituency as one of the west midlands’ worst accident blackspots. Highways England has a great plan to redesign it and make it safer for all concerned. Will the Secretary of State meet me to see how we can progress that critical improvement?

[Heidi Alexander]

I would be very happy to ask my hon. Friend the Minister for the Future of Roads to take that meeting as I suspect that she will be closer to some of the detail of the work that National Highways is doing.

Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Helen Morgan Excerpts

2nd reading
Monday 2nd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

I declare an interest as a vice-president of the Local Government Association and the granddaughter of a London bus driver. Bus services have been reduced to a dire state in my North Shropshire constituency in recent years—most drastically under the watch of the previous Conservative Government. We are one of the worst-served constituencies in England for public transport, having seen a staggering 63% reduction of our bus miles since 2015; that compares with an English average reduction of just 19%. A person in Market Drayton who wants to get to the Princess Royal hospital in Telford, which is a 20-minute car journey, is looking at something like a five-hour round trip on the bus. Only one service operates on Sundays in the whole county, between the market towns of Oswestry and Chester. In short, the current situation is unacceptable.

Just before recess, I met students from Lakelands academy in Ellesmere at Parliament’s education centre and answered their questions. One young woman asked me what we were doing to make bus services better, because she could not go with her friends to any after-school clubs due to her bus not running back to St Martin’s past 3.30 pm. I recently met members of the Oswestry Youth Forum, and they raised similar concerns. Young people in rural communities are now presented with a childhood confined to the small village or town they live in, and they are left with a lack of choice over their education, a lack of opportunity for socialising and taking part in activities outside school, and shrinking horizons. Ultimately, their options for employment can be significantly curtailed—unless, of course, their parents can afford to give them a car.

Meanwhile, older or disabled constituents who are no longer able to drive, or simply cannot afford to, are fully dependent on family members and friends to get them to where they need to be. I think everybody in this House would agree that this is driving deep and fundamental inequality, as well as holding back the economy in rural areas. That is why I am broadly supportive of this Bill.

[Jim Dickson (Dartford) (Lab)]

The hon. Lady is painting a picture that will be very familiar to my constituents in Dartford. In my case, we have deteriorating services under Kent county council, with 30 years of Conservative rule meaning that buses have got worse pretty much every year. I have written to the new Reform-led administration in Kent county council asking them to undertake to use the powers in the Bill to improve bus services in Dartford and across Kent. Would she agree that the new Bill offers huge opportunities for local authorities to improve bus services and transport networks for the benefit of residents in my constituency and hers?

[Helen Morgan]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I was about to say that I am broadly supportive of this Bill and the empowerment of local authorities to franchise bus services for those reasons. That should enhance accessibility and safety and allow local authorities to establish new bus companies, which they have not been able to do before. It is critical that local authorities can protect and establish routes that ensure access to employment, healthcare and town centres, which is one of the main aims that my own bus services Bill—Bus Services Bill No. 1, if I may be so cheeky—seeks to address, but with these new powers rightly being given to local government, I have real concerns about the ability of rural local authorities to find the funding to drive the meaningful change we so need.

In November, the Government allocated £1 billion of funding for buses, and the then Secretary of State for Transport said that the funding for rural areas would be “unprecedented”, but Shropshire council received just £1.4 million in capital funding and £2.5 million in revenue funding for this financial year. That was the 53rd lowest of 73 allocations for one of the worst-served counties in the country. That funding allocation is a tiny fraction of Shropshire council’s bus service improvement plan, which outlined the need for £73.5 million of bus funding across three years to transform the county’s bus network to an acceptable standard. The cost of franchising is also likely to be prohibitive to local authorities such as mine. The Government who promised a new formula based on need, deprivation and bus mileage to end the postcode lottery have so far made it abundantly clear that living in a rural area means less money, less public services and less opportunity.

There is a clear need for better transport in Shropshire. A third of North Shropshire’s children are growing up in poverty. Our deprivation may be hidden by our beautiful leafy setting, but it certainly exists, and by limiting the opportunities of these children, it is being perpetuated. The council spends around 80% of its budget on care, a percentage that is forecast to rise, and its costs for delivering services are high. At more than 1,200 square miles, Shropshire covers an area 27 times the size of Greater Manchester. The roughly 325,000 people who live there are relatively evenly distributed across the area, adding to the cost of delivery of those services.

I support the principles of the Bill, but there must be recognition of the desperate situation that local council finances are in, particularly in large rural areas such as mine. The looming rise of the bus fare cap from £2 to £3 is especially concerning, forcing people to fork out a significant amount every week for return travel to their job. In rural communities such as North Shropshire, alternatives to bus travel are few and far between. For the financially vulnerable who rely on buses to access services, the impact of the hike to £3 is going to be devastating.

I support the Bill’s aims, and I can see its success in cities such as London and Greater Manchester, but it is essential that rural areas are not left behind and crippled by the cost of delivering social care over a large geographical area, as they have been by previous Administrations. Buses are the best way to reduce inequality for people in rural areas and, critically, to unlock the economic growth they can offer. I hope the Minister will listen and work with his colleagues in the Treasury to help transform the opportunities for people in rural areas.

Rail Services: Open Access Operators

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Lewell-Buck. I congratulate the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) on securing this important debate on open access operators.

Rail transport in the north has suffered long-term neglect, with new plans left to gather dust. From George Osborne’s northern powerhouse speech in 2014 onwards, they have essentially been an unfunded wish list passed from one Government to the other. But under our new Government we have Great British Railways on the table, and I look forward to hearing from the Minister about how we will incorporate open access operators into our plans, because the north-south divide is real.

Total Treasury spending on rail in Yorkshire and the Humber last year was £1.25 billion, compared with £9.3 billion for London and £3.1 billion for the south-east. The current funding structure for transforming regional transport also makes it very difficult for areas such as the one that I represent in Scarborough and Whitby, incorporated into the York and North Yorkshire combined authority, to address the desperate lack of connectivity that exists. The main funding scheme that the Government inherited is the city region sustainable transport funding settlement, but combined authorities like ours do not qualify as they are not a city region. That funding gap has left York and North Yorkshire struggling to even plan a transport strategy. I hope that the Government will address that in the spending review.

Open access operators could step in to help. Coastal communities such as Scarborough have suffered for too long from poor rail services, and that has had a major impact on our economies. I have been campaigning for a half-hourly service between Scarborough and York, which would be taken for granted in other areas, but it seems an impossibility. The line was opened in July 1845. It took just one year and three days to complete the 45-mile route, but TransPennine Express, which now runs services on the line, today appears to have little of that urgency about it.

Scarborough is, of course, our first coastal seaside resort and is beautiful. We also have the North York Moors national park on our doorstep. The growth of staycations and holidays means there is real potential for visitors, as well as for the residents who are crying out for a better service. With the creation of Great British Railways, we have the chance to have one body responsible for the strategic direction of our railways, ensuring, as the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham said, that infrastructure and services work together and drive regional growth. I urge the Government to look at open access operators, because although they currently account for only 0.6% of total passenger journeys, they have massive potential to open up new routes, such as the Scarborough to London via York route. Look at the success of Hull Trains: in 1999 there was only one train a day between Hull and London, and now there are seven each weekday and six at weekends. As the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham said, new direct services are being approved and opened all the time.

I appreciate that there is a question whether open access services put extra pressure on network capacity and I look forward to the Minister’s response. However, unless we look at how we serve coastal communities such as mine, given the poor connections we will not move forward. If any operators are listening, I would love to see a direct service between Scarborough and London.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

The hon. Member is making a really important point about coastal communities. Rural communities find themselves in a similar situation, where they may have lost a direct service. Wrexham, Shropshire and Midlands Railway has an excellent plan to run a direct-to-London service through Wrexham, Shropshire and the Midlands but it is taking an inordinately long amount of time for it to get through the Office of Rail and Road. Does the hon. Member agree that we need not just keen operators but to process their applications quickly, to give the people the service they deserve?

[Alison Hume]

I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. She makes an important point about time. Time is of the essence as we strive to deliver better rail services. Perhaps we need a little of the spirit of the 19th century’s rail pioneers to fully connect coastal communities at last.

Road Safety: Young Drivers

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Tuesday 28th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Julia Buckley]

I agree, and it is absolutely excellent to hear of any support for families who have been bereaved as a result of a collision. That can be used to educate others, so that we can try to prevent accidents in the future. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention.

However, a majority of drivers wrongly assume that urban roads are more dangerous. That leads to an underestimation of the risks involved in driving on rural roads. NFU Mutual produced a code for countryside roads to support education and awareness-raising of the specific driving skills that would help. That could be incorporated into the driving test or a follow-up course of additional learning as part of the driver’s probationary period.

Many young people who live in rural areas feel isolated and, as a consequence, feel compelled to start driving as early as possible because of the lack of public transport, which leaves them unable to access college work, social or sporting activities. In Shropshire, we have lost more than 5,000 bus routes since 2010 and 17-year-olds are increasingly driving their first car out of necessity—something that would be anathema to a teenager growing up in London or Manchester, where public transport is so easy and cheap to use.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

I congratulate my constituency neighbour on securing this critical debate. She is making an excellent case for improving road safety for young people. Does she agree that putting public transport infrastructure in place is critical to giving people options, and to enabling them to have a social life and feel less isolated in rural areas without having to get in the car at a very young and very risky age?

Improving Public Transport

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Thursday 5th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

I beg to move,

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

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

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

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

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

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

[Sarah Dyke]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bus Funding

Helen Morgan Excerpts

Monday 18th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Louise Haigh]

My hon. Friend is right that the 30% cut to his bus services is absolutely shocking. Behind every one of those cuts is a human story of opportunity and ambition curtailed. I have been working closely with Kim McGuinness on speeding up the franchising process. Under the current legislation, Andy Burnham took six years to bring a single bus service under public control, despite having been elected twice in that period on a mandate to do so. We want to ensure that we drastically speed up the process and reduce the cost to local transport authorities and mayoral authorities of getting to franchising, so that the money can be spent effectively on local bus services.

[Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)]

Shropshire is one of the worst-served counties in England for public transport, having lost 63% of its bus miles since 2015, compared with a national average of about 19%. A person in Market Drayton who wants to get to the closest hospital in Telford, which is a 20-minute car journey, is looking at a five-hour round trip on the bus. We have only one service operating between Oswestry and Chester on Sundays. I am afraid that I was therefore quite disappointed by Shropshire’s £2.5 million revenue allocation in this round of funding. Will the Secretary of State meet me to learn about the huge transport challenges we face in Shropshire, and to see if we can do better?

[Louise Haigh]

I am delighted to confirm that Shropshire’s resource departmental expenditure limit allocation is £3.1 million, so the hon. Lady has already had a further £600,000 out of today’s statement.