Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Stuart, and a pleasure to see all hon. Members at this Westminster Hall debate on the impact of the timetable change on rural communities. I congratulate the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) on securing the debate, and everyone else on their contributions.

The hon. Member rightly raised concerns about the impact of timetable changes on rural communities. Timetables are the core product of the railway, ensuring that local, regional and inter-city communities are connected. On the east coast main line, the first major timetable change in more than 11 years will go live in a matter of days, on 14 December. It will deliver 60,000 additional seats per week and will improve journey times between London and Edinburgh by 15 minutes, unlocking the benefits to passengers of the £4 billion invested in infrastructure and new rolling stock on the route.

After a number of delays over a number of years, including delays in addressing stakeholder concerns, it was left to the Rail Minister to take the decision to implement the timetable. Relying on the Rail Minister to decide on timetable changes is not, frankly, a sustainable way to make decisions for an efficiently run, evidence-based and demand-led railway. It highlights the urgent need to reform our railways.

Building a timetable is a very complex task that requires balancing a number of competing demands. Balancing high-speed inter-city services with local and regional connectivity while also giving space for freight; ensuring stopping patterns are balanced with faster journey times; matching capacity to forecast demand and growth; ensuring sufficient infrastructure, power and rolling stock are in place to operate the services; maintaining a reliable service that is not prone to disruption—the list goes on and on.

Given how busy the east coast route is, the trade-off between stopping patterns and faster journeys is and will remain a common theme along the route. That is particularly important for rural communities, who quite rightly seek greater connectivity to support their local economies. Berwick-upon-Tweed station, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith), is an example: some 20% of passengers travel to London King’s Cross or other mainline stations south of Newcastle. That compares with around 52% of passengers who travel to either Edinburgh or Newcastle.

I remain confident that the changes to the east coast main line timetable better align the train service to the journeys passengers make, while retaining the key early-morning LNER trains to London. Furthermore, nearly all tickets to London will be interchangeable on other services, even for passengers having to change trains for LNER services at Newcastle. Additionally, while my hon. Friend may rightly point to fewer LNER services at Berwick-upon-Tweed in the new timetable, the service level is comparable to similarly sized destinations with a similar draw for tourism.

TransPennine Express introduced five additional services post covid; that will increase to eight in the new timetable. Berwick, with 147,000 passenger journeys to London each year, will have two hourly services to and from King’s Cross with additional trains in the morning. That is comparable to Harrogate and Lincoln, which have annual passenger journey numbers to London of over 250,000 and 275,000 respectively.

Other inter-city services provided by CrossCountry and TransPennine Express will offer at least hourly services each way from Berwick-upon-Tweed to Edinburgh, Newcastle and cities in Yorkshire. CrossCountry will continue to offer hourly services linking Berwick-upon-Tweed with Birmingham, Bristol and destinations in Devon. Despite these complexities, no timetable is ever the final one, as the Rail Minister told my colleagues. There is always scope for improvement, investment and growth. Passenger and economic needs change, and the railway will always need to adapt.

However, it is only fair to allow the new east coast main line timetable to settle in and embed. Once established, potential tweaks to stopping patterns or the wider timetable may be possible. Before I move on, it is worth noting that customers travelling from Berwick to London can purchase tickets from the same range of fares, regardless of whether they are travelling on a direct service or changing at Newcastle or York.

Under the Government’s plan for growth, it is not solely the reliance on rail services that will underpin growth in local communities, particularly in rural areas. The Government’s integrated national transport strategy is a critical piece of the jigsaw. It will focus on creating a transport network that works well for people wherever they live across England, including those in rural areas, and will empower local leaders to deliver good transport for their areas.

[David Smith]

I thank the Minister for his answers thus far. I may be slightly gazumping him—he may be coming to this—but one key thing that has not come out in the debate so far is investment. Ultimately, we all realise that the east coast main line is overused and very stretched. I thank the Government for the £3 billion of extra investment in the first year of our Government compared with the previous year. My key question for the Minister is: can rural lines be considered? The Northumberland line in south Northumberland has been a great success; we need something similar in north Northumberland. Could that investment go to rural areas as well?

[Simon Lightwood]

This Government remain ambitious for our rail and have set up fantastic objectives in the Railways Bill. I am sure that the Rail Minister will have heard exactly what my hon. Friend has said about further investment in the rail system. Of course, by addressing the main barriers that people face in accessing good transport, such as reliability and integration, we will improve access to opportunities and services, drive economic growth and create sustainable—rather than environmentally impactful—journeys that connect all our communities.

Devolution also has a role to play, whether that is in the form of local economic growth initiatives or by helping to shape local and regional transport networks across all modes of transport. Another key part of the new approach to devolution is funding. We have listened to what local government needs and are working to simplify funding to help local authorities to deliver on their local priorities. Multi-year, consolidated funding settlements will give local transport authorities greater freedom and flexibility to make the strategic decisions that best impact their local areas.

Let me return to the railways, and specifically the work of reform that we are carrying out. Great British Railways will be established to be the directing mind when future timetables are designed. Above all, it will be more responsive to local needs. GBR’s geographic business units will bring today’s infrastructure management and passenger services together in a single local team to manage track and train together, providing a locally focused face of the railway and a single point of leadership for local leaders.

Local stakeholders will have a role in providing evidence to Great British Railways to support the case for how future timetables can be designed to support local and regional GDP growth. They will have a say on how investment is prioritised to ensure that our railways continue to grow in terms of both revenue and capacity for more journeys, as well as supporting the high levels of performance that passengers rightfully expect. Through the rail reform agenda, local communities will be able to set out their aspirations for more stops or faster journeys, work with Great British Railways to identify the priority areas for investment and agree plans for sustainable growth that can and will be delivered. That is how this Government, the Department for Transport and Great British Railways will better serve rural communities.

As for the comments from the Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), I find it difficult to take lessons from the Conservatives when it comes to our railways after the complete mess they left our railways in. He did touch on buses. On the bus fare cap, the previous Government had allocated no further funding beyond the end of the last cap. Despite the terrible fiscal inheritance, we managed to sustain a £3 bus fare cap and will continue to do so until March 2027. On top of that, just a couple of days ago I announced £3 billion—a billion pounds over each of the next three years—which is going directly to local transport authorities in order to improve buses in any way they see fit. That could include further concessions on bus fares. Crucially, rather than being a “Hunger Games”-style competition for bus funding, the new formula includes an important element on rurality, recognising the distinct challenges that our rural communities face. That has been built into the funding formula.

Today’s discussion was an opportunity to reflect on the importance of timetable changes and their impact on rural communities. I thank the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk for securing this important debate, and all hon. Members for their contributions.

Automated Vehicles Regulatory Framework

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Thursday 4th December 2025 Written Statements

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

I wish to provide the House with an update on further steps the Government are taking to implement the Automated Vehicles Act 2024 and kickstart economic growth. Self-driving vehicles have the potential to increase opportunities and break down barriers for how people and goods move around the country, making transport safer, greener, and more reliable. Strengthening road safety, improving accessibility, and ensuring safeguarding remain central to this vision.

The AV Act delivers one of the most comprehensive legal frameworks of its kind, with safety at its core. It sets out clear legal responsibilities, establishes a safety framework and creates the required regulatory powers. This includes measures designed to protect all road users—pedestrians, cyclists, disabled people, and vulnerable groups—through a consistent, evidence-based safety framework.

The AV Act implementation programme supports the Government-wide programme of work using artificial intelligence to deliver the plan for change, with AVs providing a core example of how AI could bring tangible benefits to the public. This technology has the potential to enable safer journeys, improve access to essential services, and enhance independence for people with accessibility needs.

Today, we have published an ambitious call for evidence on developing the AV regulatory framework. This call for evidence will help inform secondary legislation, guidance and policy development, ensuring the AV regulatory framework remains proportionate, forward-looking and responsive to emerging technologies while upholding strong safeguards for public safety, data protection, and responsible operation.

The call for evidence is split into two main chapters: “getting AVs on the road” and “once AVs are on the road”.

Chapter 1 seeks further evidence relating to:

Vehicle type approval: the assessment of whether the vehicle is technically safe before it is allowed on to the GB market; this is closely linked to the ongoing work at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe to develop automated driving systems regulations.

Authorisation: the new process of authorising a self-driving vehicle for use on GB roads without a driver, allowing legal responsibilities to shift to the authorised self-driving entity when the vehicle is driving itself.

User-in-charge: if a self-driving feature requires a responsible human inside the vehicle, that human is the driver while the feature is disengaged, and becomes a UIC when the self-driving feature is engaged. The UIC will not be responsible for the way the self-driving vehicle drives when the feature is engaged.

Transition demands: a time-bound demand for the UIC to take control of the vehicle when a self-driving vehicle needs to safely transfer control to a human driver.

Operator licensing: the use of vehicles with self-driving features that do not require a human driver to be present while active in vehicles which may have no human on board at all.

Insurance: AVs must be insured to legally drive on our roads, but motor insurance for AVs will be different from that for conventional vehicles. As a result, insurers will need timestamp data recorded by the vehicle, showing if the system was active, to determine liabilities.

Chapter 2 seeks further evidence relating to:

In-use regulation: ongoing monitoring to confirm that vehicles continue to meet the self-driving test requirements, and in particular, the requirement to be able to safely and legally drive themselves once on the road. In-use regulation will also monitor where authorisation requirements and operator licensing requirements continue to be complied with.

Sanctions: a new set of civil and regulatory sanctions available to Government. They include compliance notices, redress notices and fines as well as variation, suspension or withdrawal of an authorisation or a licence.

Incident investigation: a process for no-blame incident investigation involving AVs, similar to existing aviation and rail investigation branches, allowing for continuous improvement based on real-world evidence

Cyber-security: appropriate cyber-security controls must be in place throughout the vehicles service life; this extends to the security of the operation centre and includes cyber, personnel and physical security.

Questions relating to data, costs and benefits appear throughout the call for evidence, and there are stand-alone sections on accessibility and environmental impacts. While the focus of the call for evidence is on the safety framework, we are particularly mindful of potential accessibility benefits and so have included accessibility considerations.

We seek views from a broad range of respondents, including road users, industry, academics, road-safety experts, accessibility specialists, first responders, trade unions, and the wider public. Their insights will help ensure that as AV technologies develop, they do so in ways that strengthen safety, widen access, and safeguard the public.

A copy of this publication will be placed in the Library of each House and published on gov.uk.

[HCWS1131]

M6: Junction 38

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Monday 1st December 2025 Commons Chamber

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

I begin by congratulating the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) on securing this debate on the M6 Lune gorge project and his passionate advocacy on behalf of his constituents. Our strategic road network is one of the nation’s most vital pieces of infrastructure, with our motorways and major A roads forming the backbone of connectivity across England. The network links our towns and cities, ports and airports, and it is relied upon by millions of people and businesses every single day. The Government remain firmly committed to its resilience, renewal and replacement, with nearly £1.3 billion allocated for capital renewals in 2025-26.

I note the hon. Gentleman’s commitment not only in securing the debate but through his wider engagement with National Highways and the Government on this matter. He is a strong advocate for his constituents, businesses and local road users. While recognising the need for the M6 Lune gorge scheme, he has campaigned extensively to minimise the impact on his constituency. I am therefore grateful for the opportunity to address the M6 Lune gorge project and the concerns raised regarding traffic management, and in particular the option of providing temporary slip roads.

Let me assure the hon. Gentleman that this Government, working closely with National Highways, fully recognise the scale and significance of the project. We understand the profound impact that transport infrastructure has on local communities, and not just in terms of connectivity but in safeguarding economic growth and quality of life. That is why we are committed to delivering a solution that is both robust and responsive to the needs of those it serves.

The M6 is a key corridor on our strategic road network and the main north-south transport axis. Early intervention is therefore essential to ensure those structures remain safe, resilient and in service. The M6 Lune gorge project is a significant and complex renewal scheme on the strategic road network. It is located within the gorge of the River Lune in Cumbria, between the Lake District and Yorkshire Dales national parks. Its purpose is to enable the vital replacement of bridge decks along a 10 km stretch of the M6 from Castle Howe bridge, adjacent to junction 38, to High Gill bridge, north of junction 37. The scheme involves eight similarly constructed structures, each now at, or approaching, the end of its operational life. Over time, these bridges have suffered significant deterioration, driven by increased traffic volumes, heavier vehicles and the growing impacts of climate change.

Construction on this project is scheduled to commence in the spring of 2027. During this period, road closures will be necessary, including the consecutive closure of both the southbound and northbound carriageways at junction 38, with diversion routes in place for road users throughout to maintain connectivity.

Safety remains National Highways’ foremost priority. To protect both the workforce and road users, there will be occasions when the full closure of the junction is unavoidable. These closures will be scheduled during weekends and overnight periods, when traffic is lighter, in order to minimise disruption. As construction approaches in spring 2027, National Highways will finalise these plans and provide clear, timely communication to ensure that road users and local communities are fully informed, to enable them to plan their journeys. The Government and National Highways remain firmly committed to engaging with local communities, to listen to the concerns and to mitigate disruption wherever possible. Following feedback from the local community, National Highways announced in September 2025 the deferral of works on Lawtland House bridge to provide an additional route of access for residents of Tebay while essential works are undertaken at junction 38.

During the initial design stages of the project prior to May 2024, National Highways considered and assessed the opportunity of using temporary slip roads. At that time, this approach was not considered feasible due to spatial constraints, value for money considerations, the need for significant lane and speed restrictions and the likelihood of a costly extension to the overall construction period.

[Tim Farron]

If possible, I would be grateful to have sight of the workings showing National Highways’ consideration of the slip roads, and what drawings and designs it did and then discarded. I have not heard of this to this date, and I am not convinced that it did that at all.

--- Later in debate ---

[Simon Lightwood]

I am quite certain that the hon. Gentleman will continue his engagement with National Highways, and I am sure that they can have that conversation together.

As I said, during the initial design stages of the project, prior to May 2024, National Highways considered and assessed the opportunity of those slip roads. However, following further engagement by National Highways with local communities, additional proposals for temporary slip roads were submitted by stakeholders in September and October 2025. While these broadly reflected options previously deemed unfeasible, further information was provided by an independently commissioned engineering consultancy company. National Highways has committed to a detailed feasibility review of the information produced by that consultancy company. The review is under way and will consider the impact on road users and the costs of the scheme, and with consideration of local communities. The review is expected to conclude by January 2026 and National Highways has committed to provide the outcome of this work by the end of January. I look forward to receiving the report, alongside the hon. Member and other stakeholders.

The hon. Member mentioned traffic impact assessments. National Highways understands the impact this work will have on the region and has undertaken an assessment of the impact on traffic flows of the proposed traffic management arrangements. In line with standard practice, National Highways has prepared and shared a traffic management strategy with stakeholders, which will be refined into detailed plans as we approach construction in spring 2027.

I fully understand the hon. Member’s concerns regarding the impact of road closures during the construction of this project. These are legitimate and important considerations for local communities and road users alike. National Highways has no intention of inconveniencing road users, but it accepts that, due to the nature and scale of this type of work, especially where there is a need for road closures, some level of disruption is unavoidable. However, let me assure him that National Highways is committed to carefully reviewing the proposals submitted for temporary slip roads.

The M6 Lune gorge project represents an essential renewal of the strategic road network—a critical transport corridor in our country. The scheme is not simply about replacing infrastructure; it is about safeguarding connectivity, supporting economic growth and ensuring the safety and resilience of a route that serves thousands of road users every day. Without sustained and strategic investment, the strategic road network risks deterioration, which would constrain economic growth, erode productivity and lead to significantly higher long-term costs. I am sure that the hon. Member will agree that investing in the maintenance and renewal of our road network ultimately benefits the whole community.

This Government, working in close partnership with National Highways, are fully committed to delivering this project in a way that minimises disruption to road users and local communities. That is why every effort is being made to plan carefully, communicate clearly and implement measures that reduce inconvenience wherever possible.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for bringing this matter for debate and for his continued advocacy on behalf of his constituency. I welcome ongoing engagement with him following National Highways’ review of the additional slip road proposals, and as this important project progresses to see what we can achieve to provide a positive outcome for road users and all stakeholders, including his constituents.

[Tim Farron]

I feel that the Minister is about to conclude, so I just want to press him on the meeting with myself and the local community. Is he willing to do that? He is welcome to come to Westmorland, but we would happily come down to see him here.

[Simon Lightwood]

As I mentioned, I think it would be a good idea to wait until January to understand the outcome of the assessment that National Highways is undertaking on the slip road proposals.

Question put and agreed to.

Driving Test Availability: South-east

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Wednesday 26th November 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I thank the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) for the opportunity to respond to today’s debate on driving test availability in the south-east. I am grateful to all right hon. and hon. Members who have spoken on behalf of their constituents.

We fully recognise the frustration felt by families and young people, especially in the south-east. We recognise the financial strain on families, from lesson costs to travel and accommodation for distant tests. No learner should have to travel hundreds of miles for a test. Reducing waiting times and making the system fairer will help to ease those pressures, especially in rural and semi-rural communities. The Government are committed to restoring fairness and functionality to the driving test system. The ability to drive is not a luxury; it is a necessity for many, opening doors to employment, education and independence, as has been mentioned.

[Sir Iain Duncan Smith]

Will the Minister give way?

--- Later in debate ---

[Simon Lightwood]

I will make some progress first because there is a lot to cover. When access to driving tests is delayed, those opportunities are put on hold and, frankly, that is unacceptable. Across the south-east and the country, driving test waiting times remain a significant concern. Across Great Britain, the average waiting time for car practical tests in October 2025 was 21.9 weeks. In England, it was slightly higher at 22.4 weeks. In some parts of the south-east, learners face waits of five to six months; in London the figure can reach 23 weeks.

Those are not just numbers; they represent real frustration for learners, families and businesses. The pandemic increased demand for provisional licences, and more learners passing theory tests and population growth have all contributed to unprecedented pressure on the driving test system. I need to be transparent: the approaches the DVSA has taken so far have not been sufficient to meet the aspiration of reducing waiting times to seven weeks.

[Sir Iain Duncan Smith]

I do not wish to delay the Minister, but there is a concurrent theme throughout, which is the sheer incompetence of the DVSA over a long period. Does the Minister think that it would be better to have an inquiry into what is wrong with the DVSA and its failure to deal with these issues? It should not be left just to politicians; it should have tackled those issues. Will he commit to having a serious look at the functionality—the bureaucratic dysfunctionality—of the DVSA?

[Simon Lightwood]

I hear what the right hon. Gentleman has said. I will leave no stone unturned when looking for solutions to drive down those test delays. Even with all the measures we have put in place—including the additional test allowance incentives for examiners, which resulted in 56,000 additional tests being conducted between June and October this year, when compared with the same period in 2024—we are still not able to keep up with the rising demand. Reducing waiting times remains our top priority and we will continue to do all we can.

I want to update right hon. and hon. Members on the measures announced by the Secretary of State for Transport to the Transport Committee on 12 November. They are based on the outcome of a major consultation—not rushed or knee-jerk as the Opposition said—that received more than 90,000 responses, and are designed to make the driving test booking system fairer and to stop learner drivers being exploited.

I acknowledge the stress experienced by those who feel the need to join the early morning website queues. There are more new booking slots available on Tuesday to Friday for those who choose not to or cannot book tests on Monday mornings, but there is more that we can do. That is why we are taking strong action against bots and third-party resellers. We will reform the booking system so that only learner drivers themselves will be able to book and manage their practical driving tests. The number of times that a learner can move or swap a test will be limited to two, and there will be a limit on the area that a test can be moved to once booked.

[Tom Gordon]

Will the Minister elaborate on whether there will be further input from driving instructors? Has there been an impact assessment of the effect that removing their ability to book tests will have on the system overall?

--- Later in debate ---

[Simon Lightwood]

These actions were taken as a consequence of the 90,000 submissions and the work that we did in the DVSA and the Department, so they are based on feedback. These changes will make access fairer and will prevent unofficial businesses and third parties from reselling tests at inflated prices. They will prevent tests from being booked in quiet areas, only to be moved to high-demand areas.

[Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)]

Will the Minister give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will make some progress.

Local learners in quiet areas will have better access to tests at their preferred centres, and examiner resources will be focused where demand is highest. Reform to the booking system will give greater control to learner drivers. It will remove the ability for third parties to exploit the system, and will make booking a practical driving test fairer for all.

These changes require both legislative and technical updates, and implementation is expected to begin by spring 2026. I assure Members that I will do everything I can to move as quickly as humanly possible.

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

As the mum of three teenagers, I know at first hand the challenges of getting a driving test—it took us a year to get one for my son. Constituents have shared their concerns with me. One person said that they logged in at 6 am on Monday morning, and they were 24,000th in the queue. I welcome the Government’s crackdown on bots and third party bookings—that is good to hear—but will the Minister clarify what plans he has to help constituents between now and the implementation in spring 2026?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will come on to those points. I assure Members that I will provide regular updates on the bots work as we move towards delivery. I absolutely accept that it is urgent.

Our agreement with the Ministry of Defence is not a headline-grabbing gimmick. It is important that we do everything at our disposal to drive down the wait for tests, and I make no apologies for that. Thirty six defence driving examiners will conduct driving tests for one day a week for 12 months. They will focus on car tests, but that offers the flexibility for vocational testing if required.

Those measures are in addition to the action we have taken so far, which includes doubling examiner training capacity to accelerate the recruitment and qualification of new examiners; introducing tougher terms for driving instructors who book tests on people’s behalf; reintroducing the additional testing allowance scheme for up to 18 months to provide more tests; continuing with the Ready to Pass? campaign, which 95% of users rate as useful, to encourage learner drivers to take the right action to prepare for the driving test; and recruiting and training 450 new examiners.

Despite the DVSA recruiting and training 344 driving examiners, the number of full-time equivalent examiners has increased by only 46, so retaining driving examiners is just as important as recruiting them. That is why we are giving examiners an exceptional payment next year of £5,000 to encourage more to stay. Those combined actions demonstrate our commitment to tackling this issue systematically and listening to feedback to create a fairer system for everyone.

Let me pick up a few of the comments from hon. Members. On temporary test centres, obviously we continue to review the DVSA estate, but frankly we need to focus on ensuring that we have enough examiners. I hear the pleas from some hon. Members, but it is not possible to have a driving testing centre in every town, although we do try and make sure it is as equitable as possible. I hear the idea behind extending the hours. However, our regulations state that we have to ensure that the eye test is done in good light.

The DVSA is already increasing capacity by conducting more tests through overtime and additional testing allowance. I am assured that it is not possible to block-book car practical driving tests. A driving licence number can be assigned to only one car practical driving test within the booking system at this time. Additionally, it is not possible to book beyond the 24-week window; DVSA only releases tests for that period.

We have been honest in admitting the challenges that the DVSA faces to meet that seven-week target. We will be assessing the input of the new measures that we announced the other day, as well as continuing to look for more ways to get waiting times down. We will be looking to that new leadership to get a grip of this as its top priority.

There was an ask to extend the two-year validity for theory test certificates. I have every sympathy with that ask, but theory test certificates are valid for two years by law, for road safety reasons. Safety should always be of paramount importance. Road safety knowledge and hazard perception skills must be up to date when the customer takes their practical test, and the Government have no plans to change this.

[Zöe Franklin]

We are here in the UK Parliament, and it is within our power to change the law to address the current situation around theory test validity. It is clear that people are struggling as a result of the two-year limit.

[Simon Lightwood]

As I went on to say, it is important for road safety reasons, and we should never we should never relax road safety. It must be paramount. I have every sympathy with that position, but it is not something that the Government plan to change.

Driving is a lifeline for many, especially in areas where public transport is limited, and we remain committed to ensuring that learners in the south-east and across the country can access tests promptly and safety. We are determined to restore confidence in the system and ensure that every learner who is ready to drive has the opportunity to enjoy a lifetime of safe and sustainable driving.

Rural Railway Stations: Step Free Access

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Tuesday 11th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[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.

Vehicle Headlight Glare Standards

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mrs Harris. I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Peter Lamb) on securing this debate about the potential merits of a new standard for headlight glare. I am sure that it will have not gone unnoticed that the UK has some of the safest roads in the world. But the effect of every death or injury on our roads is devastating for the individuals and families involved.

I make it clear that this Government treat road safety seriously and are committed to reducing the number of those killed and injured on our roads. The Department is working to develop its road safety strategy, which will include a broad range of policies, and will set out more detail in due course. More widely, the Department recognises the importance of the road network to many people’s lives and to the economy. But we know that not everyone shares the same positive experience. Glare from headlamps is a perennial issue, as there is a compromise between providing illumination with sufficient intensity and distance to enable drivers to see and anticipate potential hazards, and the propensity to cause glare for other road users.

To strike the right balance, all vehicle headlamps are designed and tested to follow international standards developed under the United Nations to ensure that they are bright enough to illuminate the road but do not unduly affect the vision of other road users. Those standards define the beam pattern and include maximum and minimum light intensities. None the less, we know that lots of people raise concerns about headlamp glare, and we are told that some drivers, as has been mentioned, choose not to drive at night because of its effects. While police collision statistics do not indicate an increase in collisions caused by headlamp glare, the issue can lead to social isolation, which impacts on people’s wellbeing and their ability to undertake everyday tasks.

My hon. Friend the Member for Crawley highlighted the impact on older residents in particular. Obviously, we have an ageing population with increasing numbers of older drivers. As people age, their eyes become more susceptible to glare due to changes in the photobiology of their eye. Better vehicle technology such as power-assisted steering, automatic transmission and improved braking and parking aids have made the driver’s task easier, and people tend to drive for longer before surrendering their licence. The number of adults more than 70 years old in England holding a full car licence has actually increased by more than 50% over the last 10 years.

[Shockat Adam]

I agree wholeheartedly that better cars mean that we are driving for longer, but does the Minister share my concern that the UK is the only country in Europe that allows people to hold a driving licence until the age of 70 without ever being required to take a sight test? Perhaps we need a sight test at initial licence application, at every 10-year renewal and at every three years from the age of 70 because we are driving for much longer.

[Simon Lightwood]

We will always keep all these considerations under review, but, as with anything, we will be evidence-led on the measures that we put in place, working with our international partners.

Road users will have experienced discomfort from headlamp glare when driving. From personal experience, I know that that is not pleasant. A few Members raised headlight aim, which is checked in an MOT once a year. During normal wear and tear, headlights can become out of alignment. The manual controls that many of us have to adjust our headlight focusing need to be changed if we have passengers in the back seats or luggage in the boot. Many Members I spoke to in advance of the debate did not know that, if they have luggage in their boot or people in the back seats, they should adjust their headlights. There is more education to be done there.

Over the years, the Department for Transport has raised the issue at the United Nations international expert group on vehicle lighting, and it was asked about the UK playing an international role. Following lengthy and significant negotiations, proposals to amend headlight aiming rules were agreed in April 2023, together with requirements for mandatory automatic headlamp levelling —a system that automatically recorrects the aim of the headlights based on the loading of the vehicle, to go back to the issue of when passengers are in the back seats or there is luggage in the boot. Those new requirements are expected to take effect in September 2027, to permit sufficient time for vehicle manufacturers to redesign their products and adapt the manufacturing process. Once implemented, those tougher requirements will help alleviate the number of cases where road users feel dazzled by vehicle headlamps.

There is, however, still much to do and much that we do not know about the underlying causes. To address the lack of clear evidence into which factors are impacting on drivers, the Department for Transport commissioned independent research in 2024 to understand better the root causes of the glare. Over several months, researchers gathered real-world glare data when driving at night, using an instrumented vehicle and machine learning analysis tools to determine the main factors that influence glare. That work was recently completed, and the final report is due to be published in the next week.

As might be expected, the results indicated that road geometry, in combination with brightness, is a key factor in glare events. The second most important factor, however, was identified to be vehicle type, suggesting that certain vehicle characteristics may be contributing to problems of glare. Given the findings of this innovative and groundbreaking research, the Department plans further research examining a range of vehicle makes and models, aimed at identifying what vehicle design factors may be responsible for increased glare. That can then be used to generate proposals for amendments to the international vehicle lighting regulations at the United Nations.

[Lauren Edwards]

Given that SUVs, which are generally larger, higher cars and have LED lights, now make up more than half of new cars sold in the UK and demand is growing, does the Minister agree that it is critical that the Government address this issue urgently?

[Simon Lightwood]

I heed the comments of my hon. Friend. Again, it is important that we are evidence-led, hence the commissioning of further research to drill down on the cause and effect.

In parallel, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency, which leads for the Department on market surveillance of vehicles and automotive components, has stepped up its activities to intercept the sale of illegal retrofit headlamp bulbs for on-road use, which we believe is one of the contributing factors. Anyone caught could face a fine of £1,000. The Department is also an active member of the Euro NCAP consumer information programme, which assesses a range of vehicle characteristics to determine a vehicle’s safety rating. Work is under way to develop a new vision protocol for 2029, which is planned to include an assessment of vehicle lighting systems to ensure that they provide forward vision while minimising the risk of dazzle for some road users.

Much has already been achieved, but we have listened and we understand that more can and must be done. We will continue to develop the evidence and work domestically and with our international partners to help ensure that people feel able to drive at night without experiencing glare or dazzle.

Connected and Automated Vehicles

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) on raising this important issue. What a fascinating and thought-provoking debate this has been.

Establishing our new regulatory framework for automated vehicles provides a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to harness the transformative impact that artificial intelligence could have on our roads. Not only will the framework strengthen our position as a global AI superpower, but automated vehicles can also be a key enabler of our plan for change. They can make transport safer, more convenient and more accessible. They could increase choice for non-drivers, including disabled people and older people. Self-driving vehicles that are zero emission can support cleaner, more efficient transport, particularly when paired with the transition to electric, helping us on our way to our net zero goals. By better enabling freight to be transported outside peak hours, they may also reduce congestion, making journeys to work easier and quicker. In doing that, automated vehicles could improve the lives of millions of people.

Although the UK’s roads are safe by global standards, every road death and injury is a tragedy for the families involved. In 2023, collisions cost medical and ambulance services an estimated £2.2 billion. Every collision prevented will improve the safety of our communities and support our NHS to get on a more sustainable footing. As many hon. Members have referenced, 88% of collisions involve human driver error as a contributing factor, and automated vehicles can be a major player in tackling that challenge. They have a faster reaction time and the ability to learn from vast amounts of driving data, and so could help reduce those numbers. Unlike human drivers, automated vehicles do not get tired, get distracted or drive under the influence. That gives them strong potential to improve road safety.

Although vehicle technologies have already provided significant advances in road safety and will continue to do so, technology is not foolproof. The UK has a heritage of world-leading intelligent regulation. Our new framework must uphold that standard and capture the opportunities while safeguarding against new risks that may arise. We have already made big achievements in this space, with the Automated Vehicles Act 2024 establishing one of the most comprehensive legal frameworks of its kind in the world.

We also play a leading rule in harmonising international rules on safety and assurance at the UN, ensuring that consistent approaches are adopted globally. That has involved close working throughout, and I am grateful for the expertise shared by industry, road safety groups, accessibility advocates, trade unions and academia to develop our thinking.

Passenger safety remains vital, and the Government intend that any organisation wishing to deploy a self-driving passenger service must have robust policies to ensure that their passengers are kept safe throughout their journey. We will continue to learn from best practice internationally, including from world-leading autonomous ride-hailing companies, to help us to achieve our safety mission.

The future of self-driving vehicles will be shaped by the public’s level of trust in their safety. Trust depends on transparency, regulation and performance. That is why the Government recently consulted on protecting marketing terms associated with automated vehicles to ensure that only genuinely self-driving vehicles can be marketed as such. In 2026, we will also consult on safety principles to ensure that all automated vehicles meet or exceed human driving standards. The Government have backed the setting-up of Partners for Automated Vehicle Education United Kingdom. PAVE UK brings together industry, academia and non-profits to provide clear and accurate information to the public on automated vehicles.

Ensuring the security of UK data is a priority for the Government. The UK has strong safeguards to ensure that data is collected and handled responsibly and securely. Companies registered in the UK are subject to our legal framework and regulatory jurisdiction. Personal data transfers abroad are subject to a high level of legal protection. We actively monitor threats to UK data and will not hesitate to take the necessary action to protect our national security.

We want to harness this sector’s huge potential to kick-start economic growth by providing the right conditions to unlock an industry that will be worth £42 billion by 2035 and will create up to 38,000 new skilled jobs. These services can also open up new opportunities in fields such as software, safety assurance, vehicle engineering, logistics and customer service.

Self-driving vehicles are not about replacing current forms of transport, but about complementing and improving them. Traditional driving roles will remain vital, and some people will continue to have a preference and choose to use human-driven services. This is about growing and improving transport options, not revolutionising things overnight.

The automated passenger services permitting scheme—I think my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) went into this—can help to facilitate pilots of commercial self-driving passenger services with no safety driver. Following our recent consultation, we are analysing responses and intend to implement the scheme from spring 2026. At present, no changes to the highway code are anticipated, although we will keep that under review.

We are delighted that Waymo has signalled its intention to bring automated passenger services to London next year under our proposed piloting scheme—subject to meeting vital safety and local authority consent requirements. Cutting-edge investment such as that is helping to deliver our mission to be a world leader in new technology and spearhead national renewal that delivers real change in our communities. Waymo’s announcement, and the previously announced ambition of other companies such as Uber with UK start-up Wayve, are evidence of the impact of the UK’s leading role in self-driving-vehicle regulation. Following the recent closure of the consultation on our permitting scheme, we will announce next steps soon.

I will touch on ghost vehicle registration plates; I know that tackling those is a passion of my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich. The safety of all road users is a top priority for the Government. As part of the development of our road safety strategy, we are considering a range of policies relating to motoring offences, and we will set out our next steps for the strategy in due course. Officials are also considering options to ensure we have a more robust, auditable register of number plate suppliers process, which would enable tighter checks on number plate suppliers. On-road enforcement for offences relating to the display of plates is of course a matter for the police.

I have time to touch on a few other points raised by Members. In terms of this being a complementary form of public transport, self-driving vehicles are not about replacing current forms of transport, but about complementing and improving. There was some concern about potential job losses and impact on the taxi industry. I think the initial deployments under the pilots are likely to be pretty small in scale. Where a taxi or private hire-like service is proposed, local licensing authorities will need to give consent to the permitting of those services. That may include consideration of the right mix of automated and other services in their area.

We have touched on cyber-security, which is at the heart of the Government’s priorities for the roll-out of self-driving vehicles. The Automated Vehicles Act allows for obligations to be placed on the authorised self-driving entity—the entity for ensuring that the vehicle continues to drive safely and legally—to maintain vehicle software and ensure that appropriate cyber-security measures are in place throughout the vehicle’s life.

Very importantly, coming back to accessibility, we recently closed the consultation on the proposed automated passenger services permitting scheme. That provided an opportunity for accessibility advocates to provide their views on the proposed approach. Just before I came to this debate, I chaired a roundtable with representatives from across the accessibility community to enhance our understanding and grow awareness of the risks and benefits that this new mode of transport can offer. We are continuing to review the need for further research, which includes consideration of how older and disabled people in particular can be involved. Examples of previous research include work undertaken to understand the extent of driver roles in supporting people to make journeys and the implications in emergency situations. We are considering developing guidance on accessibility for APS and are working to establish a group of accessibility experts to support its creation and ensure meaningful learnings from the pilot deployments. We obviously want to see the benefits realised across the country. The pilots are a decision of developers, as it stands, in collaboration with local transport authorities.

The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) raised some interesting points. Let me first cling on to the bit about “Star Trek”. [Hon. Members: “No!”] I spent at least 30 minutes thinking of that—no, not really. I am quite relieved that I am not responsible for transport at this time, although who knows in the future? We do not legislate for Northern Ireland in this area, rightly respecting Northern Ireland’s role in legislating for its road traffic laws. Northern Ireland has not sought to replicate the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018 within its legislation, so an authorised EV under a GB scheme could be driven only as a conventional vehicle in Northern Ireland.

Very briefly, because I have to wrap up, my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard touched on autonomous buses. The automated passenger services permitting scheme facilitates the piloting of bus-like services. For example, the Government have supported the trialling of self-driving bus-like services currently under way on the outskirts of Cambridge. If the operators believe that the vehicle is capable of meeting the threshold that we will set for self-driving capability, the permitting scheme will be available for it. The larger scale of buses may make these things more challenging, but through our funded trials we hope to provide a route to building the required capacity while remaining safe.

The hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) mentioned autonomous aviation and maritime. I am afraid I can only reassure him that the applicable Minister, the Minister for Aviation, Maritime and Decarbonisation, will have heard his point on that loud and clear. The same applies to the Minister for Rail and the comments from the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover), on rail.

I once again thank hon. Members for the wide range of comments. I hope they will be reassured that the Government are committed to realising the very real benefits of self-driving vehicles, particularly where they can catalyse our road safety ambitions, open up travel for many and support our national renewal efforts.

A50/A500 Corridor

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Monday 20th October 2025 Commons Chamber

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

I begin by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) on securing this debate and for speaking so passionately about transport in his constituency and the implications for the wider region. I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss transport in the region today. I assure my hon. Friend that this Government understand the significance and importance of transport to the people, communities and businesses that power local economies across the country. I have been interested to engage with the ambitious proposals for development along the A50 and A500. These roads link Stoke-on-Trent, Uttoxeter, Burton upon Trent and Derby—all areas with rich histories of industry and manufacturing, but also home to exciting innovation.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I gently point out to the Minister that there is not just a rich history of manufacturing and industry, but potentially a rich future, too. We are still an area of the country that makes many things, whether that is high-tech agricultural machinery at JCB or fine porcelain ceramics in the city of Stoke-on-Trent. The roads and infrastructure that come with that could be the growth point for north Staffordshire, which would help deliver on the Government’s economic agenda and allow the infrastructure to develop to build the homes that we need. It is win, win, win, if the Minister can confirm that we can have the upgrades we need.

[Simon Lightwood]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. The area is also home to exciting innovation, new technologies and advanced manufacturing. This Government absolutely understand the importance of such routes to our daily lives, and they are core to key Government priorities such as kick-starting the economy, delivering housing growth and tackling regional inequality. In that context, while the A50 near Uttoxeter remains the specific focus of today’s debate, it would be remiss of me not to take the opportunity to highlight how the quality of journeys and transport across Staffordshire have been and are being improved.

This Government are committed to restoring pride and trust in our transport system, which works day in, day out for those who rely on it. June’s spending review confirmed £2.3 billion of investment in local transport through the local transport grant. Staffordshire county council will receive a total local transport grant capital allocation of £92.98 million between 2026-27 and 2029-30. In addition, Staffordshire will also receive £3.39 million in local transport grant resource funding. That vital funding will help build local capability and capacity to develop and update local transport plans, to effectively deliver local transport infrastructure priorities, and to work with regional partners to progress regional priorities.

England’s roads are a vital part of our transport system. Cars remain by far the most popular form of transport. This Government are dedicated to maintaining and renewing our road network to ensure it continues to serve all road users. It is why we are committed to long-term programmes of investment to improve road links throughout the region and to facilitate the growth and development that this nation needs, and it is why local areas such as Staffordshire have benefited from the £1.6 billion record investment in road maintenance funding for the 2025-26 financial year. This marks a £500 million increase in funding, and Staffordshire will be eligible to receive £39.4 million. Building on that, we will provide £24 billion of capital funding between 2026-27 and 2029-30 to maintain and improve our motorways and local roads across the country. This funding increase will allow National Highways and local authorities, like Staffordshire, to invest in significantly improving the long-term condition of England’s road network, delivering faster, safer and more reliable journeys.

As for the specific issue of the proposal for development on the central section of the A50 near Uttoxeter, I acknowledge the difficult challenges that congestion and uncertain journey times on key routes may cause for businesses and commuters, as well as the potential impact that this may have on growth, investment and employment. We recognise that the strategic road network plays a vital role in daily lives. Through our growth mission we will rebuild Britain, delivering new homes and the critical infrastructure that underpins economic growth.

In August the Department for Transport published its draft road investment strategy, which set out the Government’s strategic objectives and included just under £25 billion of indicative funding for the operation, maintenance and renewal of our strategic road network and for the RIS3 period covering the period from 2026 to 2031. As part of the road investment strategy, the Department continues to consider improvements to the central section of the A50 near Uttoxeter, as well as junction 15 of the M6, as part of the pipeline of projects being developed for possible delivery in a future road investment strategy. I know that my hon. Friend has engaged extensively with officials from my Department, and with National Highways, on these matters for some time, passionately outlining the case for investment. National Highways is committed to continuing to develop these proposals, and, subject to a supportive business case, they will be considered for delivery within RIS4, beyond 2031—or late in RIS3, if funding becomes available.

[Gareth Snell]

I thank the Minister for being so generous in giving way. Thirteen years ago, when I was leader of the local authority in Newcastle, I joined the Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire local enterprise partnership board. This project was on the books then. The sclerotic nature of the last Government meant that it had not progressed at all, and I hate to think what investment has been lost. While I welcome the commitment that the Minister is making to future potential, will he at least recognise that we could be talking about 20 years after this was first raised by Members who are in the House today? We need a relatively swift conclusion of effort so that we at least know which projects we can green-light around the area for the jobs, the growth and the homes that we need.

[Simon Lightwood]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. National Highways will work closely with regional partners to consider the opportunities along the corridor as part of this process.

Let me end by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Burton and Uttoxeter for securing the debate. As I know he appreciates, transport plays a central role in lives and livelihoods across the country, including his constituency and the wider midlands. Today he has highlighted several important issues relating to Uttoxeter in particular. I want to reassure the House that the Government are providing record levels of investment in roads, rail, buses and active travel projects across the country to connect people with jobs, education and opportunities. I also want to reassure my hon. Friend that the Government have heard the case clearly, and will continue to take action to address the issues debated today.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Thursday 11th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Emma Lewell (South Shields) (Lab)]

5. What steps she is taking to help improve local bus services.

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

This Government’s landmark Bus Services (No. 2) Bill will deliver a step change in local bus services around the country, putting power over buses back in the hands of local leaders and enabling the delivery of more reliable, safe and inclusive routes. We are also investing £1 billion to support and improve local bus services and keep them affordable; confirming multi-year funding to allow local authorities to plan and invest ahead; and extending the £3 bus fare cap to March 2027.

[Tom Collins]

Worcester has been let down on transport. Our evening and weekend buses have been decimated, leaving our roads congested, our air polluted and our city centre cut off. I thank the Secretary of State and the Minister for Labour’s early work, which has already restored some of our local services, but Worcester needs more. Our city centre businesses, our night-time economy and our commuters need and deserve a modern system of shuttle buses running all day long and at weekends. We are the Government of partnership, so will the Minister assure me that the Department is ready to do what it takes, working dynamically and creatively with a range of public and private partners to see this vision delivered locally in Worcester?

[Simon Lightwood]

I commend my hon. Friend for his commitment to improving local bus services in Worcester. We want better buses throughout the country, and I can assure him that the Government will continue to work with local leaders to give them the powers needed to deliver bus services that meet the needs of local communities.

[Emma Lewell]

My constituents are sick of being ignored when it comes to vital bus routes being withdrawn. More than 600 of them recently signed a petition after the unexpected and rapid withdrawal of the well used No. 17. Giving more powers to local councils does not always equate to communities having more of a say. Can the Minister please explain what checks and balances are in place to ensure that, as we devolve powers, residents really are listened to?

[Simon Lightwood]

I know the bus services in South Shields very well indeed, having been born there, and I know intimately from conversations with my family the struggles that my hon. Friend’s constituents are having with bus services. Our landmark Bus Services (No. 2) Bill will allow local leaders to take back control of bus services, and I am sure that Kim McGuinness, the Mayor of the North East, will be able to do just that.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

Eastbourne district general hospital, where I was born, and the Hastings Conquest hospital are quite far apart. On a good day, it takes 45 minutes to drive from one to the other, and two hours by bus. More and more services are moving to the Hastings hospital, but we need better transport links, such as a shuttle bus, to make things seamless for patients. Can the Minister meet me and local representatives to discuss how we could secure a shuttle bus service to Hastings hospital for our town?

[Simon Lightwood]

This is why it is so important that the Government are handing local areas the power to design bus services around local needs. I encourage the hon. Gentleman to continue discussions with his local transport authority on doing just that.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

The SNP in government has introduced free bus travel for under-22s, and last week, it scrapped peak rail fares. Those measures support access to employment opportunities, put more money in people’s pockets, and support local economies, especially in suburban and rural areas. Will the Minister acknowledge those excellent measures for consumers in Scotland and consider their benefits for the rest of the UK?

[Simon Lightwood]

We have the £3 bus fare cap in England, and we have committed to continuing that up to March next year. We will continue to keep our support for bus fares under review for the future.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

As I am sure the Minister knows and agrees, improving bus services must include making them safer for women and girls. Concerningly, sexual offences on the UK bus network have increased in recent years; for example, they increased by 13% on London buses in the first six months of this year. What is his Department doing to ensure that women and girls feel safe using the bus network, and can he share with the House any more information on the work being led by the Confederation of Passenger Transport, which he alluded to in yesterday’s debate on the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill?

[Simon Lightwood]

As I intimated in last night’s debate, the Bill requires local transport authorities and bus providers to give training to their staff. They will also have the power to introduce byelaws in order to clamp down on antisocial behaviour, and violence against women and girls in particular. On police officers being able to use buses for free across the country, I share the hon. Gentleman’s ambition. I have already commissioned work with the Confederation of Passenger Transport to explore how we could deliver that.

[Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)]

3. What steps she is taking to ensure that the transport system supports economic growth.

--- Later in debate ---

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

8. What steps she is taking to support the bus sector.

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

This Government recognise the vital role the bus sector plays in keeping communities connected and able to access key services. That is why we are providing significant multiyear funding to local authorities, including more than £1 billion this financial year to support and improve local bus services and keep fares affordable, alongside the £15.6 billion we are providing for transport investment in our city regions across England. This investment will support British manufacturing, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Euan Stainbank]

The consultation on 400 jobs at Alexander Dennis closes tomorrow. It has been a time of deep anxiety for the local workers. The SNP’s ScotZEB2 scheme initially sent over three times as many buses to China as to Scotland’s sole manufacturer. Although £40 million has now been made available by Transport Scotland, it must be spent correcting this SNP industrial failure. What engagement have Ministers had with the Scottish Government regarding recently consulted-on procurement reforms and their potential benefit to the Scottish bus manufacturing and operation sectors in the long term?

[Simon Lightwood]

I convened an extraordinary meeting of the UK bus manufacturing expert panel on 28 July, attended by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Transport, metro mayors and mayoral combined authorities, to accelerate the panel’s key priorities of establishing a bus order pipeline and strengthening local value within public sector procurement. I will continue to work closely with the Scottish Government on the issue. I know my hon. Friend has worked absolutely tirelessly for his constituents in this area.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his answers. The Bus Services (No. 2) Bill passed yesterday, with many of the good things that we all wish to see happening here in the mainland, especially improving the frequency of bus services and addressing social inclusion for those who cannot get buses. Will the Minister share the good things that the Government are doing here with the relevant Minister in Northern Ireland, so that we in Northern Ireland can get some of the advantages that people have here?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will continue to have active engagement through the interministerial group and will be delighted to share the excellent work this Government are doing to re-empower local areas and their bus services.

[Lewis Atkinson (Sunderland Central) (Lab)]

9. What steps she is taking to increase the availability of driving tests.

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

We are working hard to ensure that young people can book driving tests so that they can access opportunity in their local areas. We are recruiting and training more driving examiners, doubling examiner training capacity and offering overtime payment incentives. This is producing good results, with over 10,000 more tests a month now available than there would have been without the Secretary of State’s plans. There is more work to do, and we are committed to getting it right.

[Lewis Atkinson]

Learner drivers in Sunderland are fed up of waits of around 22 weeks for a driving test. In that time, they are often facing higher costs and barriers in accessing job opportunities. Can the Minister tell the House what steps he is taking to reduce driving test waiting times in Sunderland, and when he expects those waits to fall?

[Simon Lightwood]

Obviously, there were some issues with the close of the South Shields driving test centre, but no capacity was lost as a result of that. We recognise the impact that high waiting times are having on learner drivers across the country, including in the constituency of Sunderland Central, and the importance of helping learner drivers pass quickly. On 8 September, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency launched its latest recruitment campaign, which aims to recruit additional driving examiner resource to provide much-needed test capacity in Sunderland, Gateshead, Gosforth and Blythe.

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

One of my constituents wrote to me this week about the difficulties she is facing rebooking her driving test. The nearest slot that she could find was in Swansea, two hours away from Bath. When she tried the 6 am rush, she faced a queue of 22,000, and when she finally reached the front, the site failed. Alongside test availability, will the Government review the quality and reliability of the booking system?

[Simon Lightwood]

We are absolutely committed to driving down the delays in these bookings. I would be delighted to chat further with the hon. Member to discuss the specific problems within her area.

[Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)]

When driving tests came up at Transport questions in May, it was revealed that the wait time for a driving test on average was up, from 17 weeks in July 2024 to 22 weeks now. It has since been revealed that many test centres around the country have reached the maximum legal limit of a 24-week wait. Will the Minister acknowledge that for thousands of people up and down the country waiting for a driving test—waiting for that step on the ladder to get their first job or to college through the freedom of driving—it is simply not good enough for the Secretary of State to have pushed back the Government’s new target to fix this to 2026? Real people need real answers now, so will he redouble the efforts to get the wait time at least back down to the point it was at when the last Government left office?

[Simon Lightwood]

We inherited a broken system in which many learner drivers found themselves stuck in a frustrating limbo, unable to ditch their L-plates. We instructed the DVSA to take further measures this year, and we are beginning to see early signs of improvement. We promised more tests and we have delivered more tests. The DVSA carried out over 20,000 more tests between June and August this year, and the pass rate remains at the highest it has been since May 2021. There is still more to be done and we will do just that.

[Greg Smith]

The Minister is right that there is still more to be done—there is a lot more to be done. He inherited a broken system from his own predecessor in the Department for Transport, under whom the problem got significantly worse over the last year.

I do not think the Minister is listening to the country. I cannot be alone in having an inbox full of emails from constituents complaining about the wait time to get themselves or, indeed, their children a driving test. My constituent Sarah wrote:

“Young people’s work opportunities are significantly reduced by not being able to drive,”

particularly in rural England, in this case Steeple Claydon in my constituency. Sarah sets her alarm for 5.45 every day to try to secure a test, and the best she has managed is next February. Will the Minister apologise to everybody up and down the land who sets their alarm early because the Government are making the situation a lot worse?

[Simon Lightwood]

I hope the hon. Gentleman explained to his constituent the broken system that his party left for this country. We are absolutely determined to drive down waiting times. Thanks to the proactive measures taken by the Secretary of State we have, as I said, increased tests by 10,000 a month.

[Alan Gemmell (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)]

10. What steps she is taking to support the aviation sector.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

12. What recent progress she has made on the development of policy on pavement parking.

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

The previous Government consulted on pavement parking rules back in 2020 but failed to take any action. We have had to pick up the issue from scratch since we came into office last year. A lot has changed in the UK political landscape in the past five years, and this Government’s genuine commitment to devolution has shaped our thinking on pavement parking. We will be able to say more about that, and finally publish a response to the consultation, soon.

[John Milne]

Will the Minister assure us that any enforcement powers will be extended to local authorities, not just the police, in order to make any regulations effective? Alongside that, will he reassure us that local authorities will have the power to make exceptions in areas where such restrictions would be impractical, as is the case in many streets in my Horsham constituency?

[Simon Lightwood]

We of course continue to engage actively with local authorities in the development of this policy. Local authorities already have the power to restrict pavement parking wherever there is a need by introducing traffic regulation orders, and we are exploring additional measures to help them to tackle the issue.

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

On Sunnyside Avenue in Tunstall in my Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove constituency, a particular issue with pavement parking occurs outside Mill Hill primary academy, where cars dangerously mount kerbs. Will the Minister please outline what more can be done to keep our kids safe around our schools?

[Simon Lightwood]

I encourage my hon. Friend to engage with his local authority to explore whether a TRO, as I mentioned in response to the previous question, would be appropriate in that instance.

[Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)]

13. What steps her Department is taking to support local authorities to implement major transport schemes.

--- Later in debate ---

[Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)]

16. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to update regulations on the use of micromobility vehicles.

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

Shared e-scooter schemes can provide a great way to get around, but the scooters can pose a nuisance for other people, so we need to ensure that their roll-out is both safe and properly regulated. We have extended e-scooter trials until May 2028 to allow local authorities to test how the technology works. We have also committed to pursuing legislation, when parliamentary time allows, for the full regulation of micromobility in order to create a safe shared-use network where they work for all people.

[Daniel Francis]

I declare an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for wheelchair users. Does the Minister accept that a wheelchair, whether manual or with power, is a medical device that enables disabled people to maximise their independence and live the life they choose? Does he therefore agree that the terminology of “invalid carriages” in the legislation is discriminatory and outdated and that the regulations on the use of micromobility vehicles require updating urgently?

[Simon Lightwood]

I share my hon. Friend’s view that the term “invalid carriages” in the existing legislation is outdated and no longer reflects modern attitudes or needs. This Government are committed to ensuring that disabled people have the same freedom to travel as everyone else and we recognise that mobility devices are vital for many. That is why we are reviewing the legal frameworks surrounding mobility devices, including the outdated terminology, and we will consult on that in due course.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

17. What recent assessment she has made of the adequacy of passenger rail infrastructure.

--- Later in debate ---

[Helena Dollimore (Hastings and Rye) (Lab/Co-op)]

T2. The Queensway Gateway roadworks have unleashed chaos on my constituents in Hastings and the surrounding area. The project was originally planned to last one month, but has dragged on for more than a year because of the failure of East Sussex county council to plan for the relocation of a major water main. Does the Minister share my concerns about the mismanagement of this taxpayer-funded project, and agree that serious questions must now be answered by the Conservative council?

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

I know that my hon. Friend has raised this issue time and again with East Sussex county council. The delay to the Queensway Gateway project has wreaked havoc for her constituents. Given that the project was funded with Government money, serious questions must now be asked of East Sussex county council about these issues and the delays that have come about.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)]

T3. The cost of car insurance has gone through the roof in recent years, with quoted prices rising on average 82% since 2021. Car insurance is an essential, not a luxury, so I welcome the Government’s commitment to tackle the spiralling costs for drivers in Derby and across the UK. Will the Secretary of State provide an update on what progress her taskforce is making to get a fair deal for drivers when it comes to car insurance?

[Simon Lightwood]

This Government committed in our manifesto to tackle the high cost of motor insurance, and I am pleased to see recent data suggesting that average premiums are falling. The Government’s taskforce, chaired by the Department for Transport and His Majesty’s Treasury, continues to work to identify short and long- term policy actions that may contribute to stabilising or reducing premiums.

[Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)]

T4. Rail commuters in St Neots face a rise of nearly £400 for an annual season ticket to London next year, paying over £7,000 for the first time for services plagued by delays and cancellations. How does the Secretary of State justify that policy to my constituents?

--- Later in debate ---

[Markus Campbell-Savours (Penrith and Solway) (Lab)]

T5. Penrith and the surrounding villages have endured a summer of gridlock, with junction 40 on the M6 repeatedly grinding to a halt, particularly when peak holiday traffic is heading to Cumbria and the lakes. While we await the vital A66 trans-Pennine upgrade, for which we are all grateful, will the Minister agree to meet me to discuss urgent short-term interventions that National Highways can implement to ease the pressure for my constituents?

[Simon Lightwood]

I sympathise with those suffering in congestion at junction 40 of the M6, which I am told is due to various issues. I know my hon. Friend and my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns) have been working hard to resolve those issues for their constituents. I am happy to arrange a meeting to discuss any future short-term interventions that could ease congestion with either me or my team or with National Highways.

[Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)]

T6. With increasing e-scooter usage, a small number of people are increasingly conducting antisocial behaviour while riding around on these micromobility vehicles. That is of great concern to my constituents, and I am particularly concerned that there is no minimum age requirement for the purchase of an e-scooter and no national registration scheme that could help track those using them for nefarious activities. Have the Government got any plans to introduce a national registration scheme for e-scooters?

[Simon Lightwood]

As I mentioned earlier, the Government are determined to bring, and have every intention of bringing, about legislation on e-scooters. All that will be taken into account in the development of the policy.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

T7. The £1 billion regeneration scheme at Station Hill in Reading is bringing large numbers of jobs and new housing to Reading town centre, and that is due to the Elizabeth line. Will the Minister update the House on the benefits of this wonderful railway line, both to Berkshire and across the country?

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

T8. Further to the earlier comments about driving test centres, the problem is serious in my constituency. All five of the closest centres have waiting times of 24 weeks —six months—and people are now looking to other parts of Scotland for tests. I appreciate what the Minister said about employing extra people, but can I ask that specific interest and special attention is given to Scotland, where this is a particular problem in rural areas?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will meet the hon. Member.

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

T9. Does the Minister agree that extending the Dunstable-Luton busway on to Leighton Buzzard and then Bletchley would be a real boon to more fully link the area into the Oxford-Cambridge growth area?

[Simon Lightwood]

Responsibility for local transport is devolved to local authorities, which are responsible for the operation of their networks, including the extension of busways. The Government are committed to the Ox-Cam growth corridor. Lord Vallance has been tasked with exploring options on how best to deliver economic growth in that area.

[Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)]

A workshop taking place in Bath this morning brings together key stakeholders from the rail industry and local authorities. It focuses on the development of rail services in Wiltshire, and will include the case for building a Devizes gateway station and increasing services in Melksham. Following Network Rail’s Wiltshire rail strategic study, will the Secretary of State or Rail Minister meet me and key stakeholders to discuss taking those key projects forward?

[Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)]

My constituents who use the A259 coast road are being deprived the choice of safe and sustainable travel to Brighton, as Conservative-run West Sussex county council has dragged its feet for more than three decades on delivering a cycle path. What can the Government do to help me and Shoreham-By-Cycle to push for that much-needed infrastructure, which West Sussex county council has long promised but failed to deliver?

[Simon Lightwood]

I would be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman.

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)]

I wonder whether the Secretary of State might have a word with her friend the Mayor of London about the appalling mismanagement of the Gallows Corner junction, where a flyover is being constructed. The gridlock, chaos and delays are affecting the whole Romford side of Essex, and east London. It really is chaos. Will she get it sorted out?

--- Later in debate ---

[Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)]

I, too, look forward to working with the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Selby (Keir Mather), in his new role. Last week, the Transport Committee heard that car clubs, peer-to-peer ride-sharing and car-sharing schemes align with Government objectives on transport integration, reducing congestion, increasing electric vehicle use and supporting residents in rural areas where public transport is poor. Unlike France and other countries, the sector in the UK operates in a policy vacuum, particularly since the Government withdrew the car clubs toolkit guidance in May. Is the Minister planning to address that policy vacuum?

[Simon Lightwood]

My hon. Friend is completely right, and I thank the Transport Committee for raising that important point. I have commissioned officials to consider how we can support and promote the use of car club and car-sharing schemes, starting with a roundtable of industry stakeholders. I would be delighted if she could attend. I will ensure that that guidance is reinstated.

[Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)]

Hammersmith bridge closed six years, four months and 22 days ago, cutting off the bus routes and causing congestion in Putney. I welcome the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), holding the first Hammersmith bridge taskforce meeting. When will the next one be held?

[Laurence Turner (Birmingham Northfield) (Lab)]

Half the bus sector’s funding now comes from public sources, but during the summer, National Express announced changes to bus services in my constituency with just two weeks’ public notice, which will have a really negative effect on residents in New Frankley, Allens Cross and Bournville Gardens Village retirement home. Does the Minister agree that when regulation is brought in—which is welcome—consultation must be included?

[Simon Lightwood]

I agree wholeheartedly. It is really important that local people are engaged when designing a network and making changes to it.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

The Liverpool city region Mayor, Steve Rotheram, has submitted a new town bid with Liverpool and Sefton councils, to regenerate the most deprived areas of the country. Does the Minister agree that for new towns to succeed, there needs to be proper funding for integrated transport, and will he commit to working and meeting with the mayor and the politicians to make that happen?

[Pam Cox (Colchester) (Lab)]

The A12 is a major transport route into Colchester and a vital part of economic growth in the region. Will the Minister meet me to discuss the urgent need for upgrades to its western end?

[Simon Lightwood]

I would be delighted.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

Luton station is the gateway to Luton town centre, and thanks to this Labour Government, it will soon be getting lifts to all its platforms. However, the roof still leaks. Will the Minister meet me and representatives of Luton council to see what can be done with regard to the state of the station?

[Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)]

The Padiham Greenway bridge has been closed since 2021. In December last year, this Government gave £280,000 to Sustrans to get the work finished, but there is a shortfall. The Government have given £19 million to Lancashire county council through the active travel fund and the capability fund to get this project online. Does the Minister agree that Lancashire county council should prioritise this and get it done? I thank him for his extensive correspondence with me on this topic.

[Simon Lightwood]

I know my hon. Friend is a very active campaigner in this area. I would be delighted to meet him to discuss what further pressure we can apply to ensure this project is delivered.

Regional Transport Inequality

Simon Lightwood Excerpts

Thursday 11th September 2025 Commons Chamber

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

I welcome today’s debate on regional transport inequality, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson) for securing this time. I have 10 minutes to address the many excellent contributions made this afternoon, so Members must forgive my reluctance to entertain many interventions.

For decades, this country has faced a growing deficit of opportunity fuelled by the poor connectivity that has come to define too many communities. I have experienced at first hand the frustration felt by millions of people every day. Growing up in the north-east, I could wait hours for a bus that would never arrive, so I understand that missed shifts, missed lessons and missed appointments all lead to missed opportunities for hard-working families. Poor transport has deepened divides, isolated communities and eroded quality of life, all while stifling growth, hindering productivity and deterring investment. In my own region, Leeds is one of the largest European cities without a mass transit system. We are shamefully behind the curve, with people and businesses suffering as a result—but it does not have to be that way.

This Government are turning the page on decades of decline, ending short-sighted Whitehall-centric decision making and unlocking talent, ambition and potential right across the country. We are seizing a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change the way that things are done and building a stronger transport network that works for everyone, whoever they are and wherever they come from.

Later this year, we will set out that vision in our integrated national transport strategy. We will champion transport that is designed, built and run with people in mind, recognising that different places face different challenges and need different ways to solve them. The strategy will aim to make transport safer, more reliable and more accessible, helping everyone to feel more confident and able to use the network. We will encourage housing, healthcare and other services to work with transport, trying to tackle regional inequality in all its forms.

We know, however, that politicians in Westminster cannot fully grasp the reality of life in Warrington, Wolverhampton or Woking. That is why our Bus Services (No. 2) Bill puts power in the hands of local leaders, with the freedom to choose the approach that best serves their community. We recognise that a one-size-fits-all formula just will not work, so we are funding franchising pilots to better understand all the options on the table. The Bill also calls time on the plague of violence against women and girls and antisocial behaviour with training and enforcement measures to help make journeys safer for everyone.

We are backing those steps with landmark levels of investment. This year alone, £1 billion will help improve bus services and keep fares affordable. We will extend the £3 bus fare, which will put more money in passengers’ pockets, making bus travel a viable option for more communities, while improving access to jobs, education and healthcare where it is needed most.

We are also giving city mayors £15.6 billion to support wider local transport projects, including mass transit in Leeds, a metro extension in the north-east and so much more. To ensure that our towns, villages and rural areas, particularly outside London, are no longer left behind, we are not only committing £2 billion to help them tackle their unique challenges, but just last week we confirmed an extra £104 million in resource funding for local authorities, showing that they can better design, decide and deliver ambitious local transport projects.

[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?

[Simon Lightwood]

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.

[Liz Saville Roberts]

Will the Minister give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

I am going to make progress.

We are also delivering new train stations in the south-west and in Yorkshire, creating brand new rail links across the midlands, and backing road schemes to better connect and grow communities. Not only will those measures improve people’s everyday journeys, they will also create jobs, power growth and unlock new homes for families.

Last week, we announced that we are simplifying fares and expanding digital ticketing trials to make rail more accessible and affordable, with new digital trials now live in the east midlands and launching later this month in Yorkshire. Passengers can sign up to take part and benefit from automatic best-value fares, making rail travel simpler, smarter and more flexible.

Our commitment to investing is clear, but we are also working behind the scenes to ensure that every penny is well spent. We are reviewing the Green Book to give a fair hearing to all parts of the country. We have plans to recruit 300 new planners into the public sector by 2026, supporting local authorities and implementing new planning policies to enhance housing supply, leveraging private investment to bolster public funding and forging a faster and more efficient planning system.

I am pleased to see a strong contingent of Members from the east midlands in this debate, and I am glad that they recognise, like me, the importance of improving transport links to drive growth across the country and tackle regional inequalities. We recognise that transport spending has historically not been evenly distributed across the country. We are taking action to drive up prosperity and living standards across the UK, including addressing any imbalances where appropriate. That is not just the case for the east midlands. We are investing across the whole country, from enabling mass transit in West Yorkshire to reopening the Bristol and Portishead line in the south-west.

We are providing the East Midlands combined county authority with over £2 billion through the transport for city regions fund, with the east midlands receiving over £450 million from the local transport grant and the integrated transport block. I am very pleased to see that Mayor Claire Ward intends to use some of that £2 billion of funding to progress the case for a permanent bridge at Darley Abbey. That means that the east midlands will receive significantly more local transport spending per head than the England average in the coming years— £561 per person against an average of £398. We are investing in the region, including delivering improvements to the east coast main line and progressing the A38 Derby junctions scheme, which will improve safety, reduce delays and support house building. We are also committed to delivering the A46 Newark bypass, subject to planning consent.

I recognise the frustration that hon. Members and their constituents feel about the electrification of the midland main line, but we have had to prioritise our funding on schemes that will make the greatest difference for passengers and economic growth as soon as possible. Further electrification of the midland main line has been paused but will be kept under review as part of our pipeline for future funding. The new trains, however, will increase seat capacity and will mark a step change in passenger experience.

Members have advocated passionately for other schemes in their local areas. While I cannot address every scheme that was raised in this debate, we will always need to prioritise the funding that we have available. My officials will continue to work with their counterparts in local government and with other stakeholders to better understand local needs and potential pipelines.

I will now turn to specific contributions made in the debate.

[Richard Foord]

Will the Minister give way?

[Simon Lightwood]

No—I have a lot to get through.

I welcome the many contributions from across the House on issues with bus services in Members’ constituencies. The Government know how important good, reliable and frequent bus services are to local communities, and that is why we are investing £1 billion this year to support and improve services and giving local leaders more powers to improve services through the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill.

While I welcome the contribution of the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon (Gregory Stafford), he not only seems to have forgotten the 14 years in which his party had the opportunity to improve bus services in regional constituencies but he also forgot to mention that his Government gave £26 million to the Conservative-controlled county councils that cover that constituency.

However, in rural areas and places with poor public transport, driving is not a luxury; it is a lifeline. The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency continues to work hard to combat the unscrupulous practice of reselling tests across the country. In July, we announced over 50 new road and rail schemes, many of which will benefit the constituencies of Members who have spoken in this debate. That includes the midlands rail hub, which we are backing with £123 million and which will create links to more than 50 locations. It also includes the Middlewich Road scheme, the A38 Derby junctions work, transformed rail services across Manchester and new stations in the south-west. We are addressing under-investment in Welsh rail infrastructure with a 10-year funding package of £445 million to meet its long-term connectivity needs and to help kickstart Welsh economic growth.

Turning to the comments of the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew), I will admit that the previous Government did allocate £27 billion for the road investment strategy 2, but that was revised down to £23 billion. From my calculations, RIS3 represents a £3 billion increase compared with the funding for RIS2.

[Jerome Mayhew]

Will the Minister give way on that point?

[Simon Lightwood]

I will bring my remarks to a close because Madam Deputy Speaker is growing impatient.

I am here today not just as the Minister for Local Transport, but as someone who knows what it is like to live in an underserved community, who has stood in the rain waiting for buses that never arrived, and who has seen at first hand the impact of poor connections, so I could not be more intent on delivering real change where it is needed most. Our plan for English devolution will shift even more power away from Whitehall. Our industrial strategy will drive investment and growth in all regions, and our infrastructure strategy will boost living standards across the UK.

This issue transcends departmental silos. Since last July, we have worked tirelessly to restore confidence and certainty. We are looking after the pennies and the pounds to improve lives and livelihoods across Britain, and I will continue to tackle the shameful deficit of opportunity that plagues this country. We will continue delivering our plan for change until we get the job done.