(5 days, 9 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I congratulate the hon. Member for Crawley (Peter Lamb) on securing this important debate. I have worked on this issue for some time, and I am really pleased that the Government are picking it up. I thank the Minister for engaging with it following my written questions in March and my early-day motion in April. I also thank Rod Dennis from the RAC and Denise Voon from the College of Optometrists for meeting with me around six months ago to discuss this in detail.
Constituents have contacted me about the dazzling effect of modern car headlights and the disorientation and loss of confidence that causes when driving at night. That is particularly concerning in rural communities, such as those in Newton Abbot, where driving is essential for work, appointments and, as we have heard, social contact. Losing confidence behind the wheel can quickly lead to social isolation, especially among older residents—it is delightful to see such continuity and consistency on this across the House.
LED headlights can be up to 10 times brighter than traditional halogen bulbs and that the glare they produce can lead to photostress with recovery times of up to 30 to 60 seconds. That is a long time to be effectively driving blind. Glare will always exist to some extent, but we can manage it by regulating brightness, colour, temperature and headlight height and angle. By working with drivers, manufacturers and medical experts, we can make real improvements.
From my own experience as a former non-executive director at the Department for Transport’s Vehicle Certification Agency, I know how crucial type approvals and manufacturing standards are. Let us use that system to ensure new vehicles meet safe and consistent lighting standards. Of course, we must also use the MOT test to ensure that headlights are correctly aligned and comply with the regulations.
Finally, the UK has the opportunity to show international leadership on this issue, contributing to the UN taskforce and helping to set a global example in road safety and driver wellbeing. Let us get this sorted, so that headlights help us see the road ahead, and not blind us to it.
(6 days, 9 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) not only on securing this debate, but on her positive and optimistic vision of the future, which I really like.
I think many of us have long had a vision of autonomous vehicles based on science fiction. Reality is not quite there yet, but it is moving fast towards it. We have seen the progress on autonomous cars, and the various pilot sites in the USA—and closer to home, as we have heard.
Fully autonomous cars in Newton Abbot are, I suspect, quite some way off. Drivers who have not grown up with our Devon lanes find them hard enough, and we can only dream of having white lines on the edge of the road. In well-defined urban environments, it is quite another matter, largely dependent on the legal and insurance issues that we heard about earlier. We could easily see AVs soon beyond the trial stages that we have today. However, we have some issues in running trials of uncrewed maritime and air connected and autonomous vehicles.
I recently met with a retired navy air traffic controller, who told me of his latest work using aerial drones to deliver test samples from Scottish islands to mainland hospital labs, Project CAELUS, which had excellent success. We could use that sort of technology to get samples between our hospitals in Devon, which would be good—it would avoid the summer traffic. However, it took eight months to get the flight path agreed and approved, and it required a special use airspace application for beyond visual line of sight uncrewed air system operations under civil air publication 1616. I ask the Minister, or perhaps his colleagues, to seek speed from the Civil Aviation Authority in reforming CAP1616, including a more proportionate approach to BVLOS airspace, to improve clarity, efficiency and transparency while maintaining safety.
Additionally, a couple of weeks ago, as part of the armed forces parliamentary scheme, we visited the Royal Navy in Portsmouth and saw a connected uncrewed boat doing tests in the harbour. It was being controlled by a team on land—essentially, it is a standard 5-metre rigid inflatable boat with a remote skipper. Following it was a crewed Navy boat, which is required by maritime regulations to constantly escort uncrewed 5-metre RIBs. The Navy fleet of the future described in the strategic defence review is highly dependent on the use of uncrewed vessels to supplement and complement the existing Navy ships. We must be able to develop them and test them in a more effective way, as we are doing with cars on land.
I urge the Minister, or perhaps his team, to see what exemptions and exceptions may be made. Marine guidance note 705(M) exemptions are limited to boats less than 4.5 metres and at 6 knots or slower. That does not cover what the Navy needs to do. Unless we can find a way to rapidly and safely regulate, and not prevent, tests of remote air and marine craft, we will struggle to get to where we need to be. The Chair of the Ukrainian Parliament, on his recent visit, stated that their drone technology lasted about three months, by which time they had developed a whole new set-up. We need to speed up.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
I would like to highlight the deep inequalities in transport spending across our country and to speak specifically about the railways in the south-west. Per head of population, our region receives significantly less investment in transport than the average. In fact, the south-west region receives the second lowest funding in the country after the east midlands, as we heard from the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson)—only we do not have the prospect of electrification to look forward to on our main line, probably ever.
According to the House of Commons Library, transport spending in 2023-24 was £429 per person in the south-west, compared with £1,313 per person in London, £729 in the north-west and £706 in the west midlands. That is not levelling up; it is levelling down. This matters on a daily basis for my constituents in Newton Abbot and for communities across Devon and the south-west. Our transport links are essential to our economy, tourism, trade and everyday life, but all too often they are neglected.
We all remember when storms tore through our sea wall at Dawlish in 2014, cutting the south-west off from the rest of the country. The cliffs blocked the line for eight weeks, costing the south-west economy some £1.2 billion. The Dawlish rail resilience programme was split into five phases, with the last being the most critical. That vital phase has not been funded. The Government have rejected all solutions put forward by Network Rail so far, and now we do not even have the funding to develop an acceptable alternative. Every winter storm puts our connection with the rest of the UK at risk, and the Government are not taking this seriously. I urge the Government to give Network Rail the parameters they will accept and clear funding to design a solution. Lack of a solution could cost another £1.2 billion if, or when, the cliffs fail again.
Accessibility is another area where we are falling short. Too many railway stations in the south-west still lack step-free access. I would particularly like to see better access at Teignmouth station. Disabled passengers are forced to choose their journeys based not on where they want to go but on which stations they are able to use. That is not acceptable in this day and age.
Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)
My hon. Friend rightly draws attention to Teignmouth station. Despite its large size, my constituency does not have a single mainline train station, but our closest station, Bodmin Parkway, also has severe accessibility challenges. It has been put on the list for accessibility upgrades, but that could happen as late as 2032. Will he join me in calling on the Minister to make those upgrades as quickly as possible, so that our constituents do not miss out?
Martin Wrigley
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend.
When we had the railway station defences rebuilt at Dawlish, we did get the benefit of a lift. Teignmouth still does not have that. Before the lift was put in, disabled passengers were put on what is called a barrow crossing—they were literally put on a trolley and wheeled across the railway lines. That is just not acceptable.
I say this clearly: the south-west deserves its fair share. We need fairer transport spending, proper disabled access at every station and a full commitment to complete the resilience work that will protect our region’s lifeline rail route. I will keep pressing the House and this Government until the south-west gets the fair share it deserves.
Martin Wrigley
I am delighted with all the investment in cities with mayors; that is fantastic. However, in Dawlish, in Devon, we are once again left behind. Is that purely because we do not have a city mayor?
As I just mentioned, we have committed £2 billion to helping those outside city areas and last week committed £104 million for resource funding across the country outside city areas.
Although we are eager for local leaders to take the reins, there is still an important part for central Government to play in tackling transport inequality, particularly on our roads and railways. We are investing billions to fix historical gaps in the network, reconnecting long-forgotten areas and tackling regional disparities head on. From major projects such as the TransPennine route upgrade, East West Rail and HS2 to improving motorways in Cumbria, Greater Manchester and the midlands, or funding to maintain and improve the road network, our mission to address inequality sits at the heart of everything we do.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
In addition to the point about socially necessary routes, companies such as Stagecoach cut the frequency of essential buses—such as the No. 2 from Exeter through to Dawlish in my constituency and on down towards Paignton. That drives people away from the buses; when the frequency goes down from every 20 minutes to every 30 minutes, it makes the service unusable and takes away the social value of the route.
The hon. Member is entirely correct.
Our amendments would support local transport authorities to grow their local bus networks actively in response to demographic and economic changes, not just to manage the decline. Without the amendments, particularly amendment 66, the only requirement is for authorities to list their current services. While acknowledging the Government’s rightful drive on devolution, our Committee would not want any local transport authority to walk away from the Bill’s important objectives to promote growth, particularly in towns across England; to promote reliability and integration; and to address social isolation, inequality, traffic congestion and pollution.
(2 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. The issue of pavement parking has been raised with me in my constituency of Wolverhampton West. Measures have already been introduced in Scotland and Wales, where legislative action has been taken to deal with pavement parking. Pavement parking is also banned in much of Greater London.
We must improve our road safety and protect the most vulnerable in our society. The fines raised from illegal parking could be ringfenced for future road safety improvements. More than half of those aged over 65 report that they are worried about obstructions on the pavement. Over 80% of people living with sight loss say that pavement obstacles impact their quality of life, and nearly 90% of parents have had to step on to the road with their children due to vehicles blocking the pavement.
Encouraging walking is part of the Government’s ambition under their cycling and walking investment strategy. I repeat the assertion of the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) about publishing the Department for Transport report that was prepared in 2020.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
Does the hon. Member agree that this is almost a circular problem? The more people park on the pavements, the harder it is to walk, so the more they have to drive and the more they park on the pavements. By getting rid of it and having consistency, as my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) is asking for, we will start to solve this problem, which is so difficult for my constituents as well as the hon. Gentleman’s.
Warinder Juss
I totally agree. When I walk around and see cars and other vehicles parked on pavements, I sometimes wonder why people could not just have parked them on the road. There never seems to be any valid reason why they are parked on the pavement.
The ability for people to walk on pavements is crucial. Walking improves physical and mental health, gives greater independence to older people and takes away the risk of isolation. It means we will have fewer cars on our roads, healthier children, and more children and parents walking to school, which does not happen now because of the dangers people face when having to manoeuvre around vehicles on pavements.
I urge the Government to publish the Department for Transport report that was prepared five years ago and to ensure that we get vehicles off pavements so that we can encourage more people to use the pavements. That is what they are there for.
(3 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Heidi Alexander
I am really pleased to be able to announce today the green light for the Middlewich bypass. I know that that new 2.5 km of single carriageway bypass to the east of Middlewich will make a big difference to my hon. Friend’s constituency, unlocking swifter, easier journeys and more routes to employment and opportunities for his constituents for which he so powerfully advocates.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for greenlighting the work on the A382 into Newton Abbot. That will be a massive improvement when it is completed. May I congratulate the successful teams at Teignbridge and at Devon county council, who have been working on the project for some while? However, I am disappointed to hear that Dawlish is not on the list and will be put back. Indeed, although I am pleased that the Government will be continuing to fund the monitoring of the cliffs, may I draw it to the Secretary of State’s attention that it was a single catastrophic shift, rather than a gradual increase of the situation, that caused the collapse of the cliff at Dawlish that shut the railway for eight weeks, causing approximately £1.2 billion of damage to the south-west economy?
Heidi Alexander
As I said in response to the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling), we have already heavily invested in securing the cliffs and making the coastline more resilient in Dawlish. We are keeping that final phase of work under review, and it will be possible to determine the next course of action only once that further cliff monitoring and drainage works have taken place. None the less, I can assure him that we will keep it within the pipeline of schemes that we are considering for future investment.
(4 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber
Heidi Alexander
I assure my hon. Friend that we are taking this issue very seriously. We are reviewing licensing authorities’ compliance with existing guidance, and we will hold those who do not follow that guidance to account. We will go further following the publication of Baroness Casey’s review, and we have committed to taking legislative action to close the loopholes in the current licensing regime to achieve higher standards of safety across the board.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
The Dawlish sea wall collapsed in 2014, causing a devastating loss to the south-west’s economy of about £1.2 billion. It was not the break in the sea wall that closed the railway for eight weeks; it was the collapse of the cliffs. Will the Minister prioritise the project to secure those cliffs, which is yet to be carried out, or will she meet me? Perhaps she could even visit Dawlish to see how important this fix is going to be.
I know how important that rail line is to the people of the south-west, including the hon. Member’s constituents. We are working to determine which rail enhancement projects will be taken forward following the Chancellor’s spending review statement on 11 June. More information will be made available shortly, and I am sure that my colleague, the Rail Minister, will write to the hon. Member in due course.
(4 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Heidi Alexander
I will be saying more about the safeguarded land and the directions that apply to it in due course.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for the actions that she has taken today. They were clearly necessary, and it sounds like we are on a better track. However, HS2 provides little or nothing for rail users in the south-west, other than ongoing delays during the construction and operation of Old Oak Common. Will the Secretary of State consider funding, or prioritising the funding for, the critical final phase of the Dawlish rail resilience work that will help businesses and rail users in Devon and Cornwall—and perhaps even in Swindon?
Heidi Alexander
The hon. Gentleman tempts me to talk about the Dawlish scheme. I must admit that it is a topic I will need to take up with the Rail Minister, and I will be happy to give the hon. Gentleman a response in writing in respect of the merits of the scheme.
(7 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI could not agree more with my hon. and learned Friend. I am absolutely clear that too often local bus services are not delivering for passengers right across the country. That is why our ambitious reforms to bus services, including through the buses Bill, will give local leaders the powers they desperately need to reform services to best meet the needs of passengers, including in Kent. I am proud that our reform to bus funding allocations has meant additional funds for buses across the country, unlike under the Conservatives, who presided over 4.7 million fewer bus miles in Kent alone between 2010 and 2023.
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
I am sympathetic to the hon. Member’s concerns, but to date there is not enough evidence to prove that the repeal of the legislation would not have an adverse impact on road safety. Since 1997, holders of car driving licences have not received an automatic entitlement to drive minibuses; this is primarily to improve road safety.
Martin Wrigley
My constituency is fortunate to have both Dawlish community transport and Newton Abbot community transport. They provide vital services for many people who would otherwise be isolated and lonely but, like many other volunteer groups, they are finding it hard to recruit. Recruiting drivers for their minibus services is a particularly. Anyone who took their driving test before 1997 automatically got a D1 minibus class licence, as I did. Since then, younger drivers have had to take a new driving test; the estimated associated training and costs are between £800 and £1,800. Will the Secretary of State work with me to add exceptions to D1 requirements to cover community transport and other volunteer community groups?
Unfortunately, up to 30% of drivers who take the D1 test fail. When we are considering changes, it is important that safety is at the forefront of our thinking.
(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered railway services in the South West.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. The south-west is hugely reliant on the mainline railway—it is an economic lifeline. As I am the MP for Newton Abbot, which includes Dawlish, Teignmouth and Kingsteignton—all towns with strong railway heritage—the railway is a fundamental part of my life and community.
Devon and Cornwall are notoriously underserved by transport: there is one motorway and just two national roads. The road network in Devon is largely minor roads full of potholes. The mainline railway is the key economic lifeline for the entire region. Getting from Exeter to Paddington in a couple of hours makes a huge difference and enables many people to work part in London and part in Devon—including myself, even before I was an MP.
The value of the railway to the economy was demonstrated during the 2014 Dawlish storm incident. From a Transport Committee record, we know that the storms on 4 February and 14 February 2014 caused a 100 metre breach in the sea wall at Dawlish and a 25,000 tonne landslip between Dawlish and Teignmouth, which was exacerbated by a further landslip on 5 March. The incident closed the line for eight weeks. An immediate repair cost of £35 million, including 300 engineers—the much-lauded “orange army”—got the line running again, but the interruption cost the local economy an estimated £1.2 billion. It is estimated that the Plymouth economy alone lost £600,000 each day the line was shut.
Since 2014 a lot has changed, but the dependence on the railway has, if anything, increased. Please do not think of tourism as the only industry in Devon: remote working has blossomed, and it is clear from Office of Road and Rail statistics that the overwhelming majority of rail journeys from Exeter and the other main stations are to and from London.
Why do we need a debate on the topic? The answer is that this vital railway link is again under threat from a number of different sources. After the 2014 storm, the then Prime Minister promised that money was no object and that the line would be made resilient. A five-phase plan was drawn up and work began. The new sea wall was built, and Dawlish railway station had a rebuilt sea defence as well. The first four phases of that plan have been done and are now in place. One massive benefit was the new bridge at Dawlish, which made both platforms accessible without steps—something that we still need in too many other stations, including Teignmouth.
Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)
Many railway stations across the south-west remain inaccessible. Disabled people, unable to get support, have had serious accidents at railway stations in constituencies such as Yeovil. Will my hon. Friend join me in urging the Government to improve the Access for All programme, as well as holding operations such as Great Western Railway to account when proper support is not in place for disabled railway passengers?
Martin Wrigley
My hon. Friend makes a good point. Accessible, step-free stations are vitally important across Devon.
I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate. He is right to highlight the contact between the south-west and London in particular. It is disappointing that, even in London, almost two thirds of tube and other stations have no access for disabled people. If the Government are going to make improvements to railway movement for passengers, then accessibility for disabled people—and access to work for them—is key to that moving forward.
Martin Wrigley
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right.
When I met Network Rail in the autumn, it said that the design team for the fifth and final phase of the work would be reassigned if the funding was not forthcoming soon. That would put the project back, and significant extra funds would be required to get it back up to speed.
A few months ago, I asked the then Transport Secretary about the funding for the critical final phase of the Dawlish rail resilience programme, which is the largest piece of work. It deals with the landslips that caused the line to be closed long beyond the short time it took to repair the sea wall breach. She looked shocked to learn that the funding was not already there. Although she did not promise the funds, she indicated that the project would be a high priority.
The line has been closed on a number of occasions over the past years. The previous large cliff collapse was in the winter of 2000-01, according to the “West of Exeter Route Resilience Study”. I ask the Minister to reassure Network Rail and my constituents that that vital project will not be quietly forgotten, but will be completed to protect the economic wellbeing of the south-west and my constituents’ access to rail services.
However, there are other threats too. The Great Western main line not only runs from Paddington to Exeter, Plymouth, Penzance and the far west of Cornwall, but covers Swindon, Bristol, Cheltenham and Gloucester, to name but a few, not forgetting Cardiff, Swansea and south Wales.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. He is well aware that the south-west and Wales are connected by the Severn tunnel, which is often closed—it is likely that the closures are in his region. Does he agree that that is impacting economic growth in south Wales, and is all the more reason for Wales to receive the consequentials from HS2 funding to invest in our own railways in Wales, including the Heart of Wales line in my constituency?
Martin Wrigley
I thank my hon. Friend for that valuable point. He is absolutely right that Wales has been seen off, in terms of funding.
I sympathise with hon. Members speaking on behalf of Wales. I represent commuters using Bedwyn station, and I want to point out on behalf of Wiltshire that in 2022 we lost three of our inter-city express trains in order to support the Cardiff to Penzance line. Commuters using Bedwyn no longer have the same off-peak service into London that we had before. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, as the Government look to commission a new fleet of inter-city trains for Great Western, it would be good to see the rightful return of a proper off-peak service that supports commuters in Wiltshire?
Martin Wrigley
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: we need more services on all these lines to support our constituents.
However, everything I have outlined will be interrupted by the creation of the HS2 link to Old Oak Common. High-speed rail is a welcome improvement to our nation’s infrastructure, but the implementation of that project has been handled poorly in the past. It has ignored the largest benefit—connections within the northern powerhouse—and the focus on delivering faster rail between London and Birmingham has delivered unwanted side effects. The decision to terminate the HS2 services at Old Oak Common, three miles west of Paddington, was quickly overturned by the incoming Government. Their announcement of a resumption of the project to tunnel to Euston is to be welcomed, but the 14-platform station at Old Oak Common—eight platforms on the surface and six for HS2 underground—will impact south-west rail services for another six or seven years as it is constructed.
Anna Sabine (Frome and East Somerset) (LD)
My constituents in Frome and East Somerset are still shocked to learn about the implications of Old Oak Common. Does my hon. Friend agree that the consultation on that huge change, which will have a major impact on the south-west, was insufficient, and that we still need to have some kind of impact survey or study of the potential impact on tourism and business and the other effects of the works at Old Oak Common?
Martin Wrigley
I agree entirely that the impact of Old Oak Common is immense, and will not be just during the construction phase.
The six or seven years of delays and cancellations at weekends and Christmases have been covered in this Chamber before, so I will not repeat the list of weeks and weeks of diversions to Euston and significantly reduced services.
I have already started to receive complaints from my constituents about the inability of Euston station to cope with the volume of passengers when the trains cannot complete their journeys to Paddington. But the piece of the plan that adds insult to injury for the millions of passengers from the south-west, is the idea that every Great Western Railway train will stop at Old Oak Common, even after construction is completed. It has been somewhat unclear—some misleading averages have been quoted—but having met with GWR and Network Rail, I understand that stopping at Old Oak Common will add some five to 15 minutes to every single journey. Adding 15 minutes on to the fast train—of around two hours—from Exeter to London is significant, and even more so on the quicker trains from Cheltenham or Bristol.
Travel to Birmingham is already available via Bristol. Looking at journey times, it will usually be faster to go to Birmingham via Bristol, unless users are further east than Swindon or Westbury. Stopping at Old Oak Common will bring little or no benefit to the majority of the long-distance rail users of the west, south-west and Wales.
Can the Minister confirm that fast trains from the south-west should be able to go through Old Oak Common without stopping?
Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)
My hon. Friend is making an excellent case. Penzance, west Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly are all in my constituency, so I know that if there are problems on the link at Dawlish, that can multiply the impact of those disruptions for people in the far west of Cornwall. Does he share my concern that it seems that with this multi-billion pound HS2 project, people in Penzance, in west Cornwall, and no doubt in his constituency as well, will experience all the pain but none of the gain? If it is two hours to Exeter, it is another three hours down to Penzance. It needs to be considered that we want to avoid the unnecessary disruption to people’s lives for the next seven years.
Martin Wrigley
My hon. Friend makes a very good point. It is even harder for those down in Cornwall than it is for those in Devon.
Both of these significant impacts are examples of the historic lack of investment in the railways in the south-west. In the south-west, we can often feel like second-class travellers—watching our services get worse so that other services can be made better. Local rail services in Devon are few and far between. Rather than a few minutes between services—as we enjoy here in London—we are lucky if we have one or two trains an hour.
Trains are often made up of fewer carriages than planned due to faults or breakdowns. Schoolchildren travelling locally between towns have been unable to get on to services because they are too full, due to their having only half the expected number of carriages. A constituent told me that her young daughter was left in tears, having been denied access to a train with her group, which triggered an anxiety attack. On the London services, mobile phone coverage is barely useable for much of the journey. While for some that may be a blessed relief, it means that wi-fi connections are not reliable—a huge issue in a world where so many people rely on good connections to usefully work on the train.
I consider myself fortunate, going to Devon. If I were to continue the journey in Cornwall, the train speed would slow down considerably—as my hon. Friend the Member for St Ives (Andrew George) just mentioned. Journey times could be significantly reduced by even partial electrification, as hybrid trains on the line could speed up faster and climb some of the hills quicker. I am sure my Cornish colleagues could elaborate.
I ask the Minister to consider what might be done to show my constituents, and the population of the wider south-west, that they have not been ignored. I am asking for us to receive some benefits from new investment, not just delays to accommodate fast access for others to the midlands and the north. I am specifically asking for more train carriages for more local services; full metro services with no greater than half an hour between scheduled trains; monitoring and accelerating the roll-out of the Access for All programme; reliable wifi across the entire route; electrification to improve journey times to Cornwall; fast trains from Wales to the west to the south-west not stopping at Old Oak Common; and commitment to complete the Dawlish rail resilience programme.
Martin Wrigley
I thank the Backbench Business Committee for giving me the opportunity to have this debate, and I thank colleagues from across the House for participating. We have heard some fairly clear messages, and I thank the Minister for responding to some of them. There is certainly some hope in some of the responses that have been given.
It is clear that the south-west and Wales have been disadvantaged over a long period through lack of investment in the railways. Although large sums have been talked about, they have clearly not been used down in the south-west. I thank the Minister for recognising the importance of the rail network and for the news about increasing some of the capacity on local services, which is most welcome.
The Minister said that a resilient railway is crucial, and that is exactly right. Parsons tunnel to Teignmouth—I am afraid it is pronounced “Tinmuth”, and not like Tynemouth, which is somewhere else; it is very confusing because Teignbridge is pronounced “Teenbridge”, so the pronunciation is most unique—is absolutely vital. It was the collapse of that section that closed the railway for eight weeks; it was not the breach of the sea wall that closed it. It had happened 15 years before, and it will happen again; those cliffs are not protected. Without the fifth phase, the resilience work that has been done to date will be wasted.
What Network Rail needs is not funding today but the promise of funding in the future, to ensure that the design team is there and ready to go when funding is available. We all understand that we cannot fund everything at once—I do not think that anyone is asking for that—so I understand it when the Minister says he cannot fund everything now. What I want is a promise that this work will be funded in the future, when money is available, so that we can make sure that it is progressed and not forgotten. That is absolutely vital.
On HS2 disruption, it was interesting to hear that the purpose of Old Oak Common is to transfer passengers from HS2 to the Elizabeth line. That is a clear focus, and it shows that no real interaction is intended with GWR’s south-west and Wales services.
On the idea of stopping trains, again, I do not think we expect a complete timetable at this stage; we would just like the confirmed option that some trains will not stop. That option has been ruled out in some of the conversations I have had, and I like the fact that it is now open. Having that as a commitment, even without the full timetable, will reassure my constituents that fast trains will still be able to go through to London.
The £165 million Dawlish investment is also very much welcomed. I refer back to the £1.2 billion cost of the closure. So it is £165 million versus £1.2 billion. To me, it is obvious that that investment needs to be continued.
I end by thanking you, Dr Allin-Khan, and congratulating you on chairing your first Westminster Hall debate. I also thank everybody else who was present for the debate, and I look forward to having more conversations with Rail Ministers about the future of railways in the south-west, because we are only just beginning this journey.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered railway services in the South West.