Patrick Spencer

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comment; either he has read my speech or, as usual, he is far ahead of the curve, because I will get on to talk about the Dragon Patcher and the JCB Pothole Pro later on. He is absolutely right. To get back to where I was going, today only 3% of Suffolk’s A road network is in poor condition. That is better than the English average, with the proportion in good condition broadly aligned to national figures. Suffolk’s B and C roads also outperform national averages, with a high share in good condition and significantly fewer in poor condition. Of course residents are still angry about the state of the roads and disruption caused by roadworks. I am one of those residents. I have to drive on those roads—fortunately not every day of the week, because I am here. We use our country roads to get our children to and from school every day, so I know exactly what it is like to regularly dodge potholes. That is why we are debating how we can improve the situation. As I said recently, I recognise that the Department for Transport has substantially increased—actually, astronomically increased—funding for potholes. That should be recognised. However, I also know that the Department gave Suffolk county council a red warning for road maintenance performance in January 2026, as part of its new accountability mechanism for highways authorities. I am in favour of holding public bodies to account—it is a good thing—but it is unfortunate that in this situation the Department managed to make a slight mess of the methodology. What lessons have been learned from that process? I am wary of a system that ranks a local authority as failing when the condition of its road network is above average. I am aware of the same fraught issue in the school system, where schools that achieve very good grades are ranked as failing by Ofsted, so I understand that it is complicated. The traffic light system includes a decarbonisation test. Councils lose five points from their best practice score if they fail to provide evidence of plans to decarbonise maintenance operations and increase climate resilience. What remedial support will be made available to local authorities that do not fare well on the interactive map? There have been confusing stories of support given to high-performing local authorities, while failing ones are offered expert advice. Expert advice is almost always useless when resources are not meeting demand. Will the Minister confirm what steps the Government will take to help local authorities such as Suffolk when they are judged to be not fulfilling their statutory role? The purpose of this speech is to look to the future and probe this Government’s position on a number of ways in which our road network—not just in Suffolk but across the country—might be remediated in the long term. As I said, I recognise that the Government have provided more than £7 billion for road maintenance over the next four years, and that that will kick up slightly to £2 billion a year. It is absolutely right that we recognise that that is a significant increase in funding. Much in the same way, it is right that we recognise that it is still less than what the Conservatives committed in their 2024 manifesto, which would have delivered more than £2 billion per year straightaway. I wish to ask the Government whether they will go further on a raft of issues. First, will they take reasonable steps to ensure that highways authorities have access to technology and machinery that are imperative to the quick remediation of potholes in country settings? Suffolk county council has recently deployed a JCB Pothole Pro, which I believe is on loan from JCB, and before that it leased a Dragon Patcher. These are short-term and unstable arrangements. If we want to deal with the proliferation of potholes, it strikes me as eminently sensible that local authorities are given the financial support to use the best technology available. It is worth noting that the Conservative plan for drivers, launched by the Leader of the Opposition in April 2026, commits to a national pothole patrol, with a national taskforce deploying hundreds of specialist repair units and using technology such as the JCB Pothole Pro, to fix roads faster. Secondly, there is no doubt that British roads are in a worse condition than European comparators. RAC Europe published a survey in 2024 in which six in 10 motorists said that local roads in Europe were in better condition, with fewer potholes, than the equivalent roads in the UK. Only a fifth thought that UK roads were in better shape than those on the continent, and 57% of all drivers believed that there were fewer potholes on the motorways in Europe relative to high-speed motorways in the UK. Plenty of people therefore wonder why we do not deploy the same road maintenance strategies as other countries. Germany, the Swiss and the French have more efficient and more technologically advanced approaches to managing road maintenance. However, the British Government do not hold data on how long councils take to repair potholes. Ministers cannot tell us whether drivers are waiting longer than they used to for repairs. We rarely deploy road maintenance teams overnight on country roads. While we give utility companies the power to start work immediately through immediate emergency permits, we do not hold contractors to account for fast delivery of road maintenance works. I am inundated, as I am sure other Members are, with complaints from local residents who see traffic management mitigations in place way before and way after workers are seen tending to remedial works. Our roads are already clogged up with utility companies carrying out work on gas pipes or broadband wiring, under strict regulations, at low cost and involving different teams over long periods. This all strikes me as a classic example of British bureaucracy having a hugely negative impact on the state of British roads and our economy. The BBC published a report in 2026 that stated that traffic disruption linked to roadworks cost the UK economy £4 billion between 2022 and 2023. What can the Government do to relax the rules and regulations around road maintenance, so that companies can carry out works at night, quickly and with as little disruption as possible? Thirdly, I think that everyone, whichever side of the House they sit on, recognises that a lack of skills is blighting the road infrastructure network. A 2023 report by the Local Council Roads Innovation Group said that training budgets had dwindled—unsurprisingly, in the face of prioritisation for other areas of the road maintenance budget; that the quality of technical training was considered substandard, with a bizarre over-emphasis on net zero; and that the road infrastructure sector struggled with an image problem, such that fewer young people considered it as a potential career option, resulting in an ageing workforce. Thirty-six per cent of people in the road infrastructure construction sector are aged 55 or over. I read in a report online that there are some 140,000 vacancies, despite a population of people not in education, employment or training of more than a million. I cannot believe that there is not an easy solution to the problem of skills in the road maintenance sector, considering the underlying structure of our labour market at the moment. If we do not have the people, we will not be able to tackle an issue where scale is the major challenge. What are the Government doing to encourage young people into the transport infrastructure sector and specifically the road infrastructure sector? Lastly, I want to probe the Government’s position on the long-term de-trunking of strategically important roads. I said at the beginning of my speech that the A12 north of Ipswich was de-trunked in 2001. I am still perplexed as to why it has not been redesignated as a critically important road, given that we are building two nuclear reactors just off it. The German road network is more centrally managed than ours—and, by the way, it is far better managed as a result. If National Highways has longer-term funding visibility, as it now does, why would it not want to broaden its remit and look after more elements of our road network? Before I conclude, let me tie all this up into what I think is an increasingly obvious perspective: all of the above is futile if our economy does not grow. I will say that this Government—the Labour Government—made the right decision by increasing funding. It was a mistake—a fundamental mistake, albeit a consequence of the economic situation we faced in 2010—to cut budgets. I am sure that all Government Members are raring to go after my speech identifying a load of problems with our road network that began before 2024; that is not lost on me. I implore the Minister, and all other Members, not to give me an easy time, but to take this opportunity to rise somewhat above the “it was all down to cuts, innit?” attitude. I know the Minister comes from a place that believes borrowing to spend on infrastructure will drive long-term growth, but growth will not emerge without this Government getting to grips with debt, the deficit, our welfare budget and bringing down taxes on businesses. We have a proud history of being at the forefront of the revolution that transformed road use, when Thomas Telford and John McAdam started building roads with all-weather surfaces. There is no reason why we cannot repeat history and become the best country in the world for roads. I thank hon. Members for their time.