New Towns

Katrina Murray Excerpts

Thursday 15th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Katrina Murray (Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered new towns.

I am grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for finding time for this important debate. As we reach the 80th anniversary of the New Towns Act 1946, it feels like exactly the right moment for the House to pause and reflect on what was, at the time, a bold and radical idea, and one that sought not just to build houses, but to shape communities. Eight decades on, as we again face the challenge of large-scale house building and the prospect of a new generation of new towns, it is right that we reflect honestly on both the shortcomings and the successes of that legacy.

This debate has a personal resonance for me. I was brought up in Markinch, on the edge of the new town of Glenrothes. I went to school there, and like many people growing up in and around a new town, it simply felt like home. It was a place shaped by decisions taken long before I was born, but that defined everyday life. It feels like a fitting symmetry that, years after leaving school in 1989 and embarking on my own career journey, I now have the privilege of representing another new town in this House. Cumbernauld has just marked its 70th anniversary, and its story of ambition, achievement, challenge and renewal mirrors the experience of so many new towns across the country, which is why I am so pleased that Members from across the House are taking part today. This debate gives us the opportunity to reflect not only on what new towns have delivered, but on what they can still teach us.

To understand new towns we have to remember why they were created in the first place. Post-war Britain faced severe housing shortages, overcrowding and poor living conditions, and there was a clear recognition that simply expanding existing towns and cities would not be enough. For many families, that was not abstract policy, but daily life. One local resident, who is now a close friend, described moving from a top-floor slum with damp walls, no hot water and a shared toilet on a stair landing to a three-bedroom home with a bathroom, her own bedroom, a garden and space to live. That move was life changing.

The new towns programme was a deliberate choice to do things differently. It was not just about building houses quickly; it was about planning whole communities, with homes alongside jobs, schools, services and green space, so people could build decent lives. For those of us who grew up in or around new towns, there were some very familiar signs. You know you live in a new town when your second driving lesson is entirely about roundabouts—not because your instructor has it in for you, but because there are so many of them. Let us be honest: the only traffic lights in a new town are generally on a roundabout. You also know you live in a new town when housing numbers make no sense to anybody arriving by car, because No. 1 is across from No. 25 and can be seen from No. 43, while the next street starts at No. 420. It looks a bit like next week’s lottery numbers, but residents know—and delivery drivers very quickly discover—that it is designed to make sense on foot, as it works by paths and walkways through neighbourhoods. It may confuse the satnav, but it has been the postal worker’s friend for decades.

Behind those quirks, however, there was a serious purpose. Cumbernauld, which was designated in 1955, was built to meet urgent housing needs and offer better living conditions, access to work and a strong sense of community. It was part of a wider post-war belief that planning done properly could improve people’s lives, and for some families it changed the course of those lives entirely. Another resident told me that they do not believe they would ever have gone to university if they had not escaped Glasgow and attended a Cumbernauld school that treated children with dignity and ambition.

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

The hon. Member is making an excellent speech about the importance of new towns. I was brought up just outside Kilwinning, which is part of the Irvine new town in Ayrshire. She and I are probably of a similar age, so does she remember the campaign—the iconic campaign—in the 1980s: “What’s it called? Cumbernauld”? In her view, how successful was that campaign in bringing people to the town and new employers to the area?

[Katrina Murray]

The fact that you could not go anywhere in the ’80s without seeing that statement meant that people across the country knew about Cumbernauld. I remember seeing that wording on the tube on my first trips to London. Other new towns tried to get in on the act. “Living in Livingston” did not quite hit as well, but those ideas showed the beauty of development corporations shining a light on design more widely.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Will the hon. Lady give way?

[Katrina Murray]

I am very aware of the time, but on you go.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Lady for Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch—I hope I have pronounced that correctly; apologies if my Ulster accent has destroyed that word. The last new town we had in Northern Ireland was Craigavon back in 1965, some 60 years ago, when I was a 10-year-old starting secondary school. Does she agree that, with a growing population across the United Kingdom, new towns should be established in areas that have the space? Does she also agree that a working group must look at this issue UK-wide to provide people with communities, not just simply houses? It is not just about a house; it is about a community.

[Katrina Murray]

The hon. Gentleman must have read the other parts of my speech, as I will come to that point. As I was about to say, new towns were never meant to just be housing schemes. They were meant to be places: planned communities, where jobs, homes and services developed together, so people could build stable lives close to where they worked. That vision is clear in how Cumbernauld was developed. It brought together families moving out of overcrowded parts of Glasgow, alongside others, often younger people and professionals, who moved there specifically to work. Employment was central, not an afterthought. Major employers, including Burroughs, played a central role in the town’s early growth. It provided skilled employment at scale, initially manufacturing mechanical adding machines—remember those?—and later moving into computers and printers.

People moved to Cumbernauld for work and opportunity, and to put down roots. As industries changed, the site evolved into what is now the Wardpark industrial area, which continues to support employment in different forms. Around that, neighbourhoods were designed to function as real communities. Social housing was central, not marginal, and each area had its own shops, post office, parking, garages and public transport, with regular bus services connecting people into Glasgow and beyond. When new towns are discussed now, the focus is often on buildings or concrete. What often gets overlooked is the thought given to how people would actually live—how housing, employment, transport and green space all fit together. Cumbernauld is sometimes judged by its built form, but it is also defined by its green space deliberately woven into daily life. That is the new town model at its best.

It is impossible to talk about Cumbernauld without mentioning the town centre. In the 1960s it was genuinely celebrated: award-winning, internationally recognised, and seen as a confident expression of modernist and brutalist design. It was officially opened by Princess Margaret and Lord Snowdon. For families arriving at that time, that optimism was real: with the modern buildings, light, space and public services, they felt like stepping out of the 19th-century conditions they were used to and into the modern world.

Decades later, that same town centre went on to win awards of a very different kind, including the Carbuncle awards and the Plook on the Plinth in the early noughties. That contrast tells its own story. It is about not a lack of ambition, but what happens when bold design is left without sustained investment, renewal and long-term stewardship. Today, the town centre is undergoing long-term regeneration, made possible with the investment of the UK Government focused on making the centre work for modern life, rather than erasing what came before.

The same issues can be seen in parts of the housing stock. Houses that were built quickly, using methods that were innovative at the time, did not always stand the test of time. In Cumbernauld, areas such as Ainslie Road were affected by concrete deterioration, leading to homes having to be demolished, while flat-roofed housing—very much of its era—proved less suited to Scotland’s climate as buildings aged. But that experience has also supported local expertise, including firms like BriggsAmasco—a Cumbernauld-based flat roofing specialist investing highly in skills and apprenticeships.

These challenges were not unique to my town. Across the new towns, infrastructure and housing aged at the same time, without the funding or the governance structures to renew them properly. When development corporations were wound up and assets sold off, responsibility became fragmented. In many cases, ownership passed from hedge fund to hedge fund, with no real long-term stake in the place beyond what appeared on a balance sheet. What went wrong was not the new town concept itself, but the failure to plan properly for what came next. That is the lesson we cannot afford to ignore. If we are serious about learning from new towns, and about building new ones, the ambition at the start has to be matched by responsibility over the long term.

When we talk about new towns, it is easy to focus on plans and buildings. What really made places like Cumbernauld work were the people who stepped up, saw what was missing, and got things done; that early generation who made sure that this was their community. One of those people was Sheena Walker, a true pioneer in disability care. When she moved to Cumbernauld in the late 1960s, there was no local support for children with learning disabilities. She refused to accept that. Through sheer determination and tenacity, she brought parents together and worked across the development corporation, the council and social work to create community housing, day centres and respite care. Her drive was the difference, and the services she helped to build became so strong that families later moved to Cumbernauld specifically because of them.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. As co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on housing and care for older people, we are about to complete an inquiry into intergenerational communities. Will she join me in calling for the new new towns to be built and designed for all ages and all abilities as inclusive communities?

[Katrina Murray]

I very much commend my hon. Friend’s suggestion. What is clear is how important it is to have intergenerational towns and accessible housing.

Another local legend was Danny McGowan, who taught generations of Cumbernauld’s children to swim. He founded Cumbernauld swimming club and built it into a competitive force, driven by his passion for the sport and for giving young people confidence in the water, all despite the small challenge that the council had built the swimming pool to the wrong size for it to be a competitive pool. Rather than being put off, he worked around it, and thousands—probably hundreds of thousands—of children benefited as a result. Both those stories matter because they show that new towns were never just about infrastructure, but about people with commitment and imagination shaping communities from the inside and making places work for those who lived there.

So what does all of this tell us not just about Cumbernauld, but about new towns more broadly? One clear lesson is that long-term responsibility matters. Building homes and infrastructure is only the beginning. Without clarity about stewardship, places struggle to thrive decades later. Another lesson is that homes and jobs must be planned together. New towns worked best when people could live close to where they worked, and not allowed to become purely commuter settlements. Renewal has to start with people. Regeneration is not just about buildings and masterplans. It has to involve communities and to respect the identity of places that people care deeply about. This feels particularly relevant as the Government look to build a new generation of new towns in England. If we are serious about doing that well, we have to learn from the first generation: planning for stewardship from day one and giving communities a real voice as places grow and change.

Our first generation of new towns are no longer new towns in any meaningful sense; they are simply towns with families, histories, challenges and pride built up over generations. People were born there, raised there, worked there, stayed there, left there and came home—that is what matters when we talk about the future. I hope this debate will help to ensure that as we build again at scale, we are not simply creating new places, but committing to them for the long term. I look forward to hearing the contributions from across the House.

--- Later in debate ---

[Katrina Murray]

When I applied to the Backbench Business Committee for this debate, I said, with bravado, that there was a lot of interest, even though I had some concerns that the subject might be a little bit niche. I am therefore very glad to have seen the debate this afternoon. It has been a debate of the mothers and the grandmothers, and I wish Yvonne Bonavia a very happy birthday. It has been a wonderful opportunity to do what has been described to me as writing love letters to our towns, our garden cities and our villages, as they currently are—places that we love.

This has also been a debate about real concerns, and I hope that the hon. Member for North Bedfordshire (Richard Fuller) and my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca) have heard the experiences of my hon. Friends the Members for Milton Keynes North (Chris Curtis) and for Stevenage (Kevin Bonavia). If those are not enough, I will introduce them to my mother, whose village was subsumed into the Glenrothes new town, but she recognised that that was the only way she could stay in her area and raise a family; the jobs and her life were there.

I particularly thank my hon. Friends the Members for Harlow (Chris Vince) and for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker) for their references to town art. It does not matter if it is concrete cows, polar bears, hippos or elephants. In my case, it is totems. They were a strong part of the development corporations making ready use of the concrete at their disposal, and town artists provided beauty in the built environment. I encourage the next generation of development corporations to include town artists in the workforce. I thank everyone who took part in the debate.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the matter of new towns.