Spending Review appeal for Devon railway link
Rail campaigners are battling for £1.5m government cash in the upcoming Spending Review to make a business case for a railway link in Devon.
TavyRail campaign group would like to see a five-mile (8km) section of track between Tavistock and Plymouth reinstated.
Services to Tavistock ended in the 1960s during the cuts by Dr Richard Beeching when the railways were restructured.
The Department of Transport (DfT) said it was "committed" to delivering transport infrastructure to "boost growth and opportunity".
It added: "The Government inherited an extremely challenging financial position, and these projects will be considered as part of the upcoming Spending Review."
TavyRail said only £1.5m of the project's £150m budget was needed to complete its business case and obtain necessary reports, with the remainder not required until construction in 2028.
Richard Searight, Tavyrail chairman, said the initial outlay would pay for experts to consider whether the line to Plymouth via Bere Alston would be "practical and value for money".
He said by 2028 the government would hopefully be in a "more secure" financial position.
The previous Conservative government said savings from scrapping the northern leg of the HS2 project could be used to reopen the line between Plymouth and Tavistock.
Devon County Council (DCC) submitted a business case for restoring the line in 2022, with hourly trains to Plymouth via Bere Alston.
In 2024, the Labour government outlined plans to cancel or shelve a number of rail projects because they were promised without funding or a plan to deliver them.
Deputy mayor of Tavistock, Anne Johnson, who is also vice-chairman of TavyRail, said housing plans had been agreed "off the back of the railway" and there was a "desperate need" for it to go ahead.
Steve Hipsey, Mayor of Tavistock, said: "The current estimate is that we have about 1,600 people commuting into Plymouth every day along the A386, and that can't be a good thing in terms of sustainability and carbon emissions."
"I think the whole thing makes a lot of sense in terms of economy, sustainability and social aspects as well."
Lack of South West transport funding criticised
Government urged not to ditch Devon rail scheme
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves may have just killed Nato
There will be a moment, some time in the next few years when the US will genuinely consider leaving Nato. And if it does, we should not be surprised. It wasn't as if they didn't warn the rest of us. About the only thing Donald Trump and Barack Obama ever agreed on was that Europe must make a much bigger financial contribution to Nato. In 2014 at the Cardiff Summit, the Treasury furiously resisted the demands. All sorts of tricks were pulled and definitions were stretched to get the UK to 2 per cent of GDP. The Americans, in their polite way, asked nicely. They've been asking ever since. Because as they command all Allied forces in Nato they knew the truth about the state of everyone's forces. While public scrutiny was kept at bay using secrecy and 'operational reasons', SACEUR – Supreme Allied Commander Europe, the military boss of Nato and always an American – grew increasingly concerned as Russia got more and more aggressive. And still European capitals, including London, carried on cutting. Not until 2019 and Boris Johnson did the Ministry of Defence turn the corner with real money and real reform. Previous Conservative and Labour governments had used the Red Arrows and Trooping the Colour to pretend that all was well. But Ukraine found us out. Nato and the international community needed to act: and as we examined our inventory ministers could see just how weak we had become. I remember when we debated gifting the AS90 155mm long range artillery to Ukraine I was informed that while we had 73 guns on the books only 19 worked! Or when I tried to increase the number of tanks to be upgraded to Challenger 3s I was told it was impossible because so many of our tanks had already been stripped of parts to keep others running. You might say that I should have known all that detail on day one. But you'd be surprised how well the services can hide bad news when they want to. Last week we witnessed Labour's first defence review for more than 20 years. It was heralded by re‑announcing many Conservative procurements. As a review it was weak: clearly budget-led not threat led. The big decisions had been made beforehand, and without 3 per cent by 2030 the review would clearly be hollow at birth, as it was. It was also an insult to the men and women of the Armed Forces and the equivalent of sticking two fingers up to the White House. Today's spending review confirmed what we all feared. Rather than making tough decisions on public spending priorities, Rachel Reeves chose to use Treasury tricks to deceive us all. The Government has folded in intelligence spending, Ukraine spending and even Foreign Office money to the notional 'defence' figure. The result is that core defence spending will not even be 2.5 per cent as promised: not even close. There was no path to 3 per cent either. It was just a con all along. If John Healey spent as much time battling the Treasury as he did repeating my government's plans or deceiving the public with spin then he might have had some success. But it is clear he is Labour first and UK defence second. How dare this Government avoid the solemn duty to defend our shores and properly equip the men and women of the armed forces. Labour was the government that sent our troops to war in Snatch Land Rovers and they are destined to repeat that betrayal. Next week Donald Trump will arrive in Holland for the Nato summit. He will bring with him a message that we must all spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on actual defence, not counting spies or diplomats. The Donald will not be bought off with Treasury tricks. I was in Washington last week and some very senior people in the White House and the Pentagon genuinely believe Trump may leave Nato in two years. They are serious. So we need to either demonstrate we are pulling our weight or we need to compensate for the 70 per cent loss to Nato capability if the US leaves. Based on Rachel Reeves's efforts we will do neither. History may point to this as the moment when the UK surrendered its place in Nato and triggered its demise. And all the while, Putin and Xi will be licking their lips. Waiting for their moment. For that little bit of Estonia or Finland. The best Donald Trump can do next week is say that Nato is a club with a subscription. No money should mean no entry. Ben Wallace served as Secretary of State for Defence from 2019 to 2023. He is a former British Army officer Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Welcome for housing pledge - but is it too late for some?
Danielle has moved four times in the last nine months with her three children. They became homeless after receiving a section 21 "no fault" eviction order from their landlord, and since then their local council has placed them in a shared house, as well as in hotel rooms. Despite the government's promises to fund more affordable and social housing, Danielle told the BBC she doesn't expect a council house to become available "any time soon". In Wednesday's Spending Review, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced her plan to deliver the government's manifesto pledge to build 1.5 million new homes this parliament. The government committed to spend £39bn across 10 years for social and affordable housing in England - a move described by many social landlords and housing charities as a game-changer. Many parts of the country currently face an acute shortage of affordable and social housing. London's social housing waiting lists are at a 10-year high, according to analysis of government data by London Councils published earlier this year. The government says this investment, amounting to an average of £3.9bn a year, will be "significantly higher than what the previous government spent on affordable housing, which was an average of £2.3bn per year". Affordable housing is a wide-ranging category which includes properties let at rents of no more than 80% of local market rates, as well as shared ownership homes and social rent properties which are set at about 50% of market levels. More detail - including where the homes will be built, who will build them, and how much funding will be allocated to building socially rented homes - is still awaited. Seven ways the Spending Review affects you What has the chancellor has announced? The key points Watch: Where the money is being spent Danielle says the government's announcement feels "too late" to help her family now - but she hopes it means better chances for her children in the future. For her a permanent home "would be everything, everything". "It's security for my children, it's to know that we are never going to be put in a position like this again." Being moved every few weeks has been extremely disruptive. "It's been awful, absolute hell, it's turned all of our lives upside down. My children are constantly having to readapt." She has now been moved to temporary accommodation 18 miles from their school. "My children have to be up so early, at 5am, and then are expected to give 100% at school." You could almost hear the sigh of relief from social landlords when the billion-pound housing investment was announced. Many had warned that without significant funding and certainty, the government would never reach its housebuilding target. The government has also guaranteed how much social landlords will receive in rents over the next 10 years, meaning housing associations can plan how much they have to invest in building. Kate Henderson, head of the National Housing Federation, described the announcement as "transformational" and "the most ambitious Affordable Homes Programme we've seen in decades". Charlie Trew, head of policy at Shelter, agrees this is a "a really big moment" for the sector, but said the government needs to set a "clear target" for exactly how many social rent homes are planned. "The issue with so-called 'affordable housing' is that often it's not affordable at all and priced out of reach of people on low incomes," Mr Trew told the BBC. Shelter analysis shows that in more than four in 10 local authorities in England, a one-bed "affordable rent" home is "unaffordable for an individual on low pay", Mr Trew added. For this reason, he said it was important for the government to set a social rent target that would "focus this funding on social rent so that the cash delivers genuinely affordable social rented homes with rents tied to local incomes." Meanwhile, housebuilders said that while the announcement was good news in the long term, they were hoping for a boost now for the wider housing sector - such as a reintroduction of the help-to-buy scheme. Neil Jefferson, CEO at the Home Builders Federation, said that a year into the new parliament, housing supply and investment were "still lagging well behind where they should be". "This will likely persist until government grapples with the challenges being faced by prospective first-time buyers trying to get on the housing ladder," he said. 'Constant stress': Families tell BBC of life in limbo due to housing crisis Key points at a glance from the Spending Review Rachel Reeves outlines boosts for NHS and housing
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Winners and losers: Who got what in the spending review?
Chancellor Rachel Reeves has announced the government's Spending Review, which outlines the day-to-day budgets for departments over the next three years. The review will see NHS funding increase by 3% a year as well as more money for defence and housing. But other departments will see their budget cuts - including 1.7% at the Home Office, 2.7% at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), and 6.9% at the Foreign Office. Here BBC correspondents analyse how some key services have fared and what the decisions may mean for you. The education sector will see one of the largest funding boosts. There is money for England's schools - especially crumbling ones - as well as for training and upskilling. Those key takeaways are nestled among rehashed pledges like expanding free school meals and introducing free breakfast clubs. The core schools budget will rise by £2bn in real terms by 2029, the Department for Education says, but much of it will go on those previous commitments. Falling pupil numbers means the department can make some savings, but that money still has to pay for an awful lot. The government is staring down the barrel of ever-growing demand for special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) support. The Spending Review does not seem to address deficits racked up by councils supporting those children, but it does appear to have set aside around £700m to reform the system. Leaky schools on the government's rebuilding programme - many still waiting for builders - will also be wondering if a £2.4bn annual cash injection will suffice. The 3% annual real-terms increase in NHS spending announced by the chancellor will look generous to departments with low or no increases. That number covers day-to-day spending by the NHS, for example staff pay and the costs of medicines and patients care. The overall annual increase for the Department of Health is 2.8% - one of the highest departmental increases in the Spending Review - and includes other areas like medicines regulation and pandemic preparedness, as well as the NHS. It is worth pointing out that the health service needs real-term spending growth every year to cope with an increasing and ageing population alongside rising bills for medicines and new treatments. The long-term trend for annual UK health spending in recent decades has been around 3.5%. Aside from day-to-day funding there is also capital spending, which covers investment in buildings and equipment. In real-terms there will be no increase each year. The big question is whether that will be enough to enable staff to deliver more operations and procedures. One of Labour's pledges is to ensure more than 90% of patients in England start treatment within 18 weeks of referral. Currently it is less than 60%. Hitting that target is a big ask with all the other claims on spending. "We are happy bunnies" is how someone from the Department for Transport (DfT) reacted to the Spending Review. That is despite the department seeing its annual day-to-day budget decrease by 5% - the largest cut in the review. That hit is mostly down to a big drop in the subsidies the government has been paying to train companies since the Covid-19 pandemic. Capital expenditure - meaning money for long-term infrastructure investment – on transport is actually going up by 3.9%, among the highest. Long-term investment in transport infrastructure is clearly central to Labour's plan for "national renewal", so a good chunk of the chancellor's speech was devoted to various upgrades. Some we already knew about, some we didn't. They include a new Liverpool to Manchester rail line, a freeze on the £3 cap on bus fares in England until March 2027 and more than £15.6bn on new trams, trains and buses outside of London. The Conservatives say a lot of this is just rehashing of old announcements with little detail attached. The government says it will lay some meat on the bones of these plans next week in its so-called "infrastructure week". Apart from bus fares, which is a continuation of an existing policy, Reeves' plans are in keeping with the general theme of this Spending Review: ambitious but ultimately not materialising for quite some time - until the 2030s at the earliest. Seven ways the Spending Review affects you What has the chancellor has announced? The key points Watch: Where the money is being spent You could almost hear the sigh of relief from social landlords when £39bn was announced for social and affordable housing. Many had warned that without significant funding and certainty, the government would never reach its target of building 1.5 million homes over this parliament. But they've called Wednesday's announcement a "game changer". Guaranteeing how much social landlords will receive in rents over the next 10 years means that housing associations can plan how much they have to invest in building. Housing charity Shelter called the investment a "watershed moment". The charity's head of policy, Charlie Trew, said the amount was 70% more than the previous government invested but it was still not enough to end homelessness for good. The charity called for a "clear target" for exactly how many social rent homes are planned. A 2.3% real terms yearly funding increase for policing in England and Wales is slightly better than senior officers had feared, but forces are already warning of "some ruthless prioritisation", arguing that most of the money will be "swallowed up" by police pay rises. The chancellor stressed that an increase of "more than £2bn" will mean government pledges on cutting crime and increasing police numbers can be kept. On immigration, there is more money for the Border Security Command, rising to £280m extra a year, with promises of new kit including an army of drones to improve surveillance. Reeves also promised that the use of hotels for asylum seekers would end by 2029. But with overall Home Office spending being cut by 1.7% a year, there are knotted eyebrows at how this is all going to add up and be achieved while managing a sizeable squeeze to the department's budget. Just recently we were told that offenders recalled to prison would be let out earlier due to overcrowding. We know the government is planning on building three more prisons to deal with the capacity crisis. The chancellor said £7bn would be spent on that building project - that's more than we were told earlier this month, when the figure stood at £4.7bn. The increase in funding - an extra 1.8% each year is the second highest rise in the review - indicates the severity and urgency of the problem. But building more prisons will take years. Also announced was £700m to reform the probation service - that cash will fund further recruitment on top of the 1,300 officers the government had already said it will employ this year. Several probation officers welcomed the investment but raised concerns about their "increasing workload" and when the new hires will be functional. The chancellor has made full use of the extra £113bn in capital spending available as a result of changing her own borrowing rules. There are some big ticket items on the list, most of which were announced before Wednesday, but these large projects will take many years before people will notice the difference. An extra £14.2bn for the new Sizewell C nuclear plant will be spent over at least a decade. The same is true of an extra £39bn for affordable and social housing. New announcements included £10bn for making homes more energy efficient and a new carbon capture project in Scotland. Connecting people and places is also growth-enhancing, but again the £16bn on transport links outside of London will not see quick returns. Business groups are largely supportive of these ambitious plans and the chancellor will hope it persuades firms to spend some of their own money to boost business investment, which has been chronically low. They may want to see the detail of the upcoming infrastructure and industrial strategies. There is jam in here but it will take time to spread and the results will take longer than tomorrow. The chancellor announced that funding for science - or research and development (R&D) - would increase to just over £22.6 billion per year by 2029/30. That funding pays for scientific research across government departments such as health, defence and energy. That overall figure also includes the budget for the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) itself, which has been given £16bn per year and will use it to fund research for everything from drug development to materials science to AI – £2bn has been earmarked for the latter from 2026/27 to 2029/30. While the chancellor called this a "record", it is broadly in line with projected inflation. But the UK's Campaign for Science and Engineering said it was welcome confirmation that the R&D budget was being "protected in tough fiscal circumstances". Adrian Smith, President of the Royal Society, said the UK continued to lag behind competitors in the G7 on research and innovation investment. "We should be looking to lead," he added in a statement. "We must also go further to attract and retain global talent. "The UK's sky-high upfront visa costs are an unnecessary deterrent at a time when our competitors are rolling out the welcome mat for the brightest minds."
