
Trams in Bristol: Everything to know as £800m transport investment announced for South West
Our reporter Max Walsh rounds up today's announcement
It's been announced that the West Country will receive its share of billions of pounds worth of Government investment, to improve transport in the region.
The Mayor of the West of England, Helen Godwin, says the £800 million worth of funding will be used to improve the frequency of trains, potentially see more electric buses rolled out, and create a more joined up transport plan - which could include trams - but will require a lot more government cash to turn into a reality.
Helen Godwin added that the announcement is 'day one' of a massive undertaking, describing the current network as "poor" and "in need of fixing."
The money will be used to improve bus and rail travel across Bristol, Bath and South Gloucestershire, as well as developing plans for a wider mass transit system. But it's not the first time attempts have been made to transform travel in the West Country.
Reflecting on the announcement Heidi Alexander MP, Secretary of State for Transport and Labour for Swindon South said: 'We know that our great cities and many towns outside of London have had historical underinvestment when it comes to their public transport networks.
"Making sure that people can access public services easier- reducing congestion on the roads- this is the way we grow our economy.'
Heidi Alexander MP, Secretary of State for Transport & Labour, Swindon South
History of trams in Bristol
The re-introduction of trams in Bristol has long been discussed. It all started in 1875, when the first horse drawn tram started operating in the city.
Plans for a tram system were also outlined by Avon County Council in 1995. Called 'The Westway,' the rapid transport system was promised - but failed to materialise.
In the years since, the West Country has become a region reliant on the bus, but it's hoped, a century and a half later, that today's' 800 million pound investment - could be an indicator of their return.
Analysis from ITV West Country political correspondent Lucy McDaid
This is a huge amount of capital investment announced by Labour, and potentially a major boost for transport across (most of) the WECA region. But the key word is 'potentially'.
Unlike other parts of the country that have been allocated much more cash to make things happen, the Treasury has allocated the West of England region £800 million, with £200 million to 'help develop' a mass transit system. Whether it ever gets delivered or not is another question, and one that will follow newly elected West of England Mayor Helen Godwin around for the rest of her premiership.
During her election campaign, Ms Godwin made it clear that better buses and trains are her number one priority, so
this investment will no doubt come in very helpful. Labour also hopes it will ease some public frustration over more controversial government decisions on winter fuel payments and welfare cuts.
It's also part of a drive from Westminster to give local leaders greater power over their areas and eventually boost economic growth and - ultimately - put more money into peoples' pockets.
But today's announcement is also about painting a positive narrative before next week's much anticipated spending review, where the Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to set out a number of cuts to day to day spending in order to fund big increases to the defence and NHS budgets.
If the government can show voters that it is making some big commitments to long-term projects - like new rail routes, tram systems and hospital buildings - they might hope that people will start to see the 'change' that they promised ahead of last year's general election.
But there's one thing promising the projects, and another thing delivering them.
Rural areas- Anna Sabine MP weighs in
Some MPs in Somerset have expressed concern for their more rural constituencies - arguing they don't receive the same level of funding as more urban areas.
One of them, Anna Sabine MP, Lib Dem for Frome and East Somerset said: 'We see it with farmers, we see it with buses, we see it with discussions about broadband. I don't think they understand rural areas, I don't think they're prioritising them and it's really worrying and I have to do everything I can to keep fighting for areas like Frome and East Somerset which would really benefit from that investment.
'We also just simply need more support and understanding about how important buses are to rural areas - they absolutely unlock growth, they unlock the kind of growth the chancellor is looking for but if people can't get where they need to go- that growth can't happen.'
The Mayor admits the current public transport offering in the region is poor - which could become more of a priority when forming an effective mass transit system.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Edinburgh Reporter
40 minutes ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Edinburgh Council refuses to ban arms testing in city parks
An Edinburgh councillor has spoken out after a city committee voted not to ban arms firms from testing military equipment in city parks. In December 2024, arms manufacturer Leonardo was given permission to test communications equipment in the Braid Hills. Green councillor Ben Parker said he was 'disappointed' that councillors chose to not back his motion, which would have seen the practice banned. He continued: 'Today, Councillors had a chance to stand up for peace and instead chose inaction. 'Despite community objections and a clear moral imperative, the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Conservative parties have voted to continue to allow arms manufacturers to test their equipment in our beautiful, publicly owned, green spaces. 'The Council has previously taken a strong stance on opposing advertising and sponsorship from arms manufacturers, and it is completely hypocritical to then allow these same companies to use our beautiful public space to test their equipment. 'At a time when we are witnessing the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people, we should not be supporting companies who profit from arms sales to the Israeli Government in any way.' Cllr Parker had originally put the motion forward for discussion at May's full council meeting, but an amendment by the Liberal Democrat group sent it to the Culture and Communities Committee for discussion. In a deputation to the committee, he urged councillors to take a stand on the issue, drawing comparisons to the city's Labour council taking a stand against apartheid during the 1986 Commonwealth Games held in the city. That year's games were protested widely, and boycotted by 26 nations, due to the UK Government's relationship with the then white-minority government in South Africa. Liberal Democrat councillor Fiona Bennett said: 'I have been to Iraq twice, once in 2018 with an NGO I'm very closely involved with and again in 2019 with the UN supporting victims of ISIS. 'I saw first-hand devastation throughout northern Iraq and in particular in Mosul – images that will never leave me, and images that will haunt me, for the rest of my life. 'The events unfolding around the world right now are harrowing. And I know people on the ground in Gaza right now, I can't bear what they're telling me. 'This is incredibly difficult, we're being forced to confront balancing our ethical values and responsibilities with the very real fragility of our national security. 'This is the most fragile and uncertain political, global landscape in my lifetime, and I really worry about the future our daughters have in front of them. 'So when we talk about banning testing, are we saying there should be no such testing anywhere in the UK? 'And if so, are we inadvertently undermining our own ability to defend ourselves at a time when global threats are growing and becoming even more complex?' Councillors narrowly supported an amended version of the motion put forward by the Liberal Democrat group, which did not pursue a ban. Instead, it referenced the city's draft parks management plan, which empowers council officers to ban any activity which will or could 'endanger' any person or property. By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related

The National
41 minutes ago
- The National
Don't believe the spin – Davy Russell suffered no 'classism'
DAVY Russell came blinking into the sunlight, wiping soot from his sleeves on Friday morning. As he emerged from Lanarkshire's last remaining coal pit, the injuries of having suffered through 'classist' abuse during the Hamilton by-election campaign were nothing compared with the honour that awaited him above ground. He, Davy Russell, was to become a member of the Scottish Parliament. His heart quickened at the thought of Edinburgh's bright lights. Auld Reekie! Would the empty suits understand a bowls-playing, karaoke-crooning, shandy-sipping, authentic, real-deal guy such as he? I could go on. This is the story that Scottish Labour and some dewy-eyed commentators would have you believe. But Russell is no working-class hero. By all accounts, he is a pillar of the community in his new constituency of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. This does not make him Keir Hardie reincarnate, leading the charge against the condescension of the Holyrood elite. (Image: Craig Foy - SNS Group) Russell had a long career as a top bureaucrat in local government, becoming chums with the Glasgow Labour old boys during their time at the top in Scotland's biggest city. He used to run a business with former Rangers captain Barry Ferguson (above) and Asim Sarwar, brother of Anas. His style seems more wining and dining in the Ibrox directors' box than watching the dog racing before a few pints and a punch up down the local, or whatever similarly patronising image of 'working-class leisure pursuits' Anas Sarwar has in mind. Most pundits, myself included, had their arses handed to them on Friday morning after calling the Hamilton by-election badly wrong. READ MORE: How did Labour win the Hamilton by-election with an 'invisible man' candidate? But this was an SNP loss, with their vote halving, not a Labour victory, given they were down 3620 votes on their losing score in 2021. Russell's was a local campaign for local people, though the high drama of an unpredictable campaign – in Morgan McSweeney's back garden – set tongues wagging in Westminster, too. Scottish Secretary Ian Murray (below) and the Prime Minister both made election pitches on the floor of the House of Commons on Wednesday, each warning about the SNP's plans to downgrade the Wishaw neonatal unit. Labour's spin machine has it that it is this focus on local issues – apparently Russell spent the night before the vote addressing the Hamilton Accies Supporters Association – wot won it. If that's the case, then McSweeney's strategy which took Labour to victory on the tightest vote efficiency ever last year is very much still in play. It's less that Russell won people around to Labour; more that he managed to get most of the people who backed them last time around to do so again while SNP support collapsed. Scottish Labour are of course perfectly entitled to make the argument that voters rejected the SNP – they did – but not to try to silence their critics by accusing them of 'classism', as Sarwar did at the count in Hamilton. Criticism was levelled at Russell in the first instance because he ducked media scrutiny and because videos posted by Scottish Labour gave the impression he could barely say his own name without difficulty. It is not 'elitist' or 'classist' to point out that having some rhetorical skill may be an advantage to an aspiring politician. It is elitist to suggest that the reason someone comes across as thick is because they are from a working-class town in Scotland. And that's the argument that Hutchesons'-educated Sarwar went with. You can get the Worst of Westminster delivered straight to you email inbox every Friday at 6pm for FREE by clicking here.

The National
an hour ago
- The National
This result shows the time has arrived for make-or-break move for SNP
We didn't need Professor Curtice to highlight that SNP fortunes haven't improved since the General Election. It was readily apparent to anyone who followed this SNP leadership contesting Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse as a supposed party of 'independence' and yet not relying on it to garner support. At a time when national polling for independence is reckoned to hover around 54%, Swinney's SNP managed to garner just 12% support from Hamilton's electorate (only 29% of those who actually voted). Doesn't this prove beyond any doubt he and his party are getting it woefully wrong? At a time when the independence movement is straining at the leash for real campaigning political leadership, itching to get the campaign into full swing, hasn't the SNP's campaign chief, Jamie Hepburn, signalled indy being kicked down the road once again when in Laura Pollock's report (June 6) he states: 'Next year, we're going into a General Election for the Scottish Parliament ... the fundamental question will be who's forming the next government ... who's going to be the next first minister ... either John Swinney or Anas Sarwar.' READ MORE: Patrick Harvie: Increased UK defence spending only makes war more likely There we have it. This SNP's clear intention is to just play regional politics, presumably to secure their own positions, rather than fight the 2026 election as the de facto referendum the movement demands and the polls suggest the public desires. I suspect the new strategy SNP may be heading towards claiming that the de facto referendum should be at the next General Election and promising to make it so ... just as long as we elect them to Holyrood next year so they can 'deliver' it. Well, let's head that one off at the pass. If 2026 is ignored as the legitimate platform for Scots to determine their national status, or fail to force the referendum our democratic rights deserve, then who doubts the SNP will be soundly defeated and the independence movement will need to start from scratch to fight for independence without them; trust in the SNP decimated and Scotland's independence prospects truly parked for another generation – victory for the Unionists? If Keir Starmer, as seems likely, is about to scapegoat Rachel Reeves to secure his position, isn't it time for the SNP to scapegoat their current leader and his influencers in order to elect a leader in time for 2026 who has independence at heart, has the drive to deliver it and can persuade 54% and rising of Scots that they can do so? Hasn't the Hamilton election result shown the time has arrived for, if no serious independence leadership and drive for it, then no SNP? Jim Taylor Scotland THE loss of the Hamilton by-election to the risibly inept 'Scottish' Labour – a party so devoid of ideas it could barely muster a coherent manifesto – is not merely a setback. It is a catastrophe of the SNP's own making, a fiasco that reeks of complacency, strategic idiocy and the kind of centrist dithering that has come to define John Swinney's leadership. This was an entirely avoidable humiliation. Instead of seizing the moment – with independence support now at a formidable sum – Swinney, that master of inertia, chose to dither. His response? A pledge to wait until 75% of Scots beg for freedom before lifting a finger. One wonders if he imagines history's great emancipators –Washington, Bolívar, even the wretched Garibaldi – paused to consult focus groups before acting. When Starmer, that most unctuous of Westminster careerists, declared he would block any independence referendum, Swinney's silence was deafening. Not a word of defiance, not a hint of resistance to the colonial farce of Section 30. Instead, he opted to align with Labour – a party whose sole distinction from Reform is a marginally more polished veneer of hypocrisy. Both are Unionist to the core, united in their mission to siphon Scotland's wealth southward while offering nothing but condescension in return. The campaign itself was a masterclass in misdirection. Rather than rallying the independence movement with a bold vision, Swinney fixated on Reform – as if thwarting Nigel Farage's band of reactionary clowns was the defining struggle of Scottish nationalism. The result? A muddled, defensive mess that left voters uninspired and Labour undeservedly triumphant. Worse still, Swinney has perpetuated the worst excesses of the Sturgeon era: the cult of secrecy, the slavish deference to corporate interests (see: Flamingo Land's desecration of Loch Lomond) and the systematic sidelining of anyone with a spine. Sturgeon's legacy was to ensure that no competent successor could emerge – only loyalists and mediocrities, of which Swinney is the apotheosis. The truth is stark: the SNP have no plan for independence. No strategy beyond grovelling to Westminster for permission to hold a vote – a humiliation masquerading as diplomacy. It is a spectacle so pitiful it verges on self-parody. Swinney must go. Not with a whimper, but with the swift, decisive exit his failures demand. The independence movement deserves leaders who grasp that freedom is seized, not negotiated – and who possess the courage to act accordingly. Until then, the SNP's decline will continue, and Scotland's potential will remain shackled by the timid and the unimaginative. Alan Hinnrichs Dundee