Commons Sense

House of Commons · Westminster Hall

Lower Thames Crossing

29 October 2024 · 7 other contributors · 4,343 words

Opened by Jim Dickson Lab Dartford

Responding minister: Lilian Greenwood

Transport

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Jim Dickson raised concerns about lower thames crossing in Westminster Hall. A government minister responded.

Key points

  • Jim Dickson expresses concern over severe traffic congestion and disruption caused by the single point of failure at the Dartford crossing, citing a major technical fault that halted traffic for nearly 30 hours.
  • Dickson highlights the economic cost of 200 million annually due to lost time from the bottleneck at the Dartford crossing, which operates over its daily design capacity of 50,000 vehicles.
  • Dickson calls on the government to proceed with the Lower Thames Crossing project to add 40 billion to the UK economy and improve road capacity, urging a decision by May 2025 to begin construction.

Key requests to Government

Dickson calls for the Government to proceed with the Lower Thames Crossing project as it is vital to delivering on the Government's core missions, adding £40 billion to the UK economy and improving road capacity. He urges the government to take a decision in May 2025 after which construction can begin.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Jim Dickson Lab Dartford

Jim Dickson is concerned about the severe traffic congestion and disruption caused by the single point of failure at the Dartford crossing. He cites a major technical fault that left Dartford at a standstill for nearly 30 hours, affecting residents' daily lives, businesses, and children's education. The crossing operates over capacity with 50,000 vehicles exceeding its design capacity daily. Dickson also highlights economic costs of £200 million annually in lost time alone due to the bottleneck.

Other contributors (7)
  • Daniel Francis Lab Bexleyheath and Crayford

    Businesses in Bexleyheath and Crayford face significant travel delays due to congestion, with a 10-minute journey turning into an hour-long trip. We need options for river crossings through south London and Kent.

  • James McMurdock Ind South Basildon and East Thurrock

    The proposed 14% reduction in traffic volume is insufficient given the existing overcapacity, questioning if the project sufficiently addresses the problem despite its substantial impact on local communities. James McMurdock supports the Lower Thames Crossing, noting it will reduce traffic by 20% on opening day and retain a 14% reduction after 15 years. He emphasises that the crossing is shovel-ready and can alleviate congestion in his constituency too. With nearly 15 years of planning and five years of construction, adding another five years until a 14% reduction at best, which still puts us over capacity, this amounts to a quarter-century wasted. Given the scale and cost, we must ensure it is done correctly.

  • Jennifer Craft Lab Thurrock

    My constituents do not wholeheartedly support the lower Thames crossing, and it may only mitigate current traffic problems for five to ten years before capacity issues return. Asked if the lower Thames crossing could be considered green infrastructure when it will likely increase vehicle usage and pollution, contradicting net zero commitments.

  • Julia Lopez Con Hornchurch and Upminster

    Emphasised that the Lower Thames Crossing could transform the region's economy similar to how Canary Wharf transformed Docklands in the 1980s, highlighting its potential for economic transformation.

  • Kevin McKenna Lab Sittingbourne and Sheppey

    Called for changes to the proposal to address concerns before full consideration in spring, suggesting time to make beneficial adjustments is still available.

  • Lauren Edwards Lab Rochester and Strood

    Highlighted the potential for economic growth and job opportunities in construction, green industries, and steel through the lower Thames crossing project.

  • Lauren Sullivan Lab Gravesham

    Expressed concern over the skills hub being located in Maidstone instead of Gravesham, which could address poverty and lack of qualifications among residents. Gravesham will face poor air quality, housing shortages due to influx of workers, increased congestion, and loss of ancient woodland. The area lacks investment in training and skills.

Government Response

Lilian Greenwood

Thank you, Mr Efford. It is always a pleasure to see you in the chair. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford on securing this debate on an issue which I am well aware is of great importance and interest to him and his constituents. The application for the lower Thames crossing development consent order was made under the Planning Act 2008 by National Highways, submitted in October 2022 and accepted in November 2022. Following the examination, which concluded in December 2023, the statutory deadline has been extended to 23 May 2025 due to the general election and spending review considerations. The Government recognise that transport infrastructure is vital for growth but also acknowledge potential impacts on people and the environment. Decisions are made as quickly as possible, including ahead of any statutory deadline when appropriate. National Highways have assured a full investigation into the closure of the Dartford tunnel on 20 and 21 October. The purpose of the lower Thames crossing is to relieve demand on the existing Dartford crossings, improve connectivity between ports and the rest of the UK, and provide development opportunities in Essex, Thurrock and Kent. However, large schemes have significant impacts that need to be carefully considered. I note contributions by my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock and the hon. Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock regarding potential concerns. The final decision on the application will be based on a full consideration of evidence from all parties. The planning system plays a vital role in ensuring the right scheme is delivered, and reforms to streamline delivery processes are ongoing through the planning and infrastructure Bill. I recognise the importance of discussing funding with my hon. Friend's constituents and have committed to speaking to Treasury colleagues about facilitating this discussion.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy