New calls for A1 investment made as North Northumberland MP leads Westminster debate

Following six fatal crashes in three months, he told members that ‘the dreaded necessity of using the A1 is felt deeply throughout Northumberland’.

“The A1 holds North Northumberland back and is littered with overlapping problems,” he said. “It is not a safe road.”

"It has also become a bit of a totem for the frustrations of my northern constituents. They feel, rightly, that investment is always going somewhere else, such as the deep south – Manchester, Leeds or somewhere like that – instead of to the true north.

"With the new rules of the Treasury’s Green Book and, with a devolution agenda coming to Westminster, I hope that the Government will increase their attention to the road, now and in the years to come.”

Police data, which has not yet been updated to include the most recent incidents, suggests that since 2014 there have been 768 accidents along the A1 through Northumberland, 176 of which were serious – and 24 were fatal.

Data from 2025 suggests that intersections are responsible for 43% of crashes from Alnwick to Berwick and 30% of crashes on the southern section of the route.

"Mention Guyzance, Charlton, Hebron, Chevington, Fenwick, Belford or Denwick in my constituency and people might think of those villages, but they are more likely to think of the high-risk junctions there,” said Mr Smith.

He went on to highlight ‘reckless’ over-taking, sometimes caused by driver frustration at being stuck behind heavy goods vehicles and tractors on single-lane sections.

There were also ‘notorious’ stretches such as Mousen Bends, the danger of the merging of lanes at dual and single sections, especially for tourists who are not familiar with the route, and ‘near constant’ congestion on some parts of the route.

Mr Smith said: “All those problems – risky junctions and crossing points, dangerous or unfamiliar driving, mixed vehicle types and slow travel times – contribute to one another and create a road that lacks safety, resilience and capacity.

"There is no silver bullet for those problems, but dualling would certainly fix some of them. In the north-east and Northumberland, when we mention the A1, the first thing people think about is the dualling of the road. It is a saga that, in many ways, has been going on for over 50 years.”

He noted that while, in 2014, the Conservative Government promised to dual 13 miles of the route between Morpeth and Ellingham, the costs had ballooned to about £0.5 billion.

“No one at any point seemed to have figured out an answer to the most basic question: where will the money come from?” he said. “That is despite my predecessor for the area being, albeit briefly, the Secretary of State for Transport. While it is certainly true that dualling would do a lot of good for the road, it is also true that a particular dualling project was long dangled and never delivered.

"I am pleased to have seen the recent attempts at cross-party focus on the road, and a desire to encourage the Government to get to a place where we could get these safety improvements and, ultimately, dualling. I welcome that, and I will work with anybody who seeks to achieve that.

“It is clear that what we need most urgently are sensible safety improvements that tangibly improve the quality of the road from Morpeth to Berwick. That includes improvements at key junctions, but also signage, markings, speed cameras and the like. Because of that long-promised dualling project, there have been no significant safety improvements on the road for over a decade. I was told that by National Highways.”

He continued: “The problems along the A1 are varied and overlapping. To be absolutely fair, they have been 50 years in the making and previous Governments, including my own, have not done what has been necessary with the A1.

"We also have to be honest that fixing these problems will require years of attention. It is not going to be possible for any Government to click their fingers and sort out 50 miles of the A1 in North Northumberland, but we have to make a start, and I wonder whether this might be the Government who will fix this road once and for all. I truly hope they will.

“That is why, ahead of the next road investment strategy – RIS4 – in the coming years, I want to make the case for everything being on the table for the A1. That includes ongoing uplifts to the road’s condition, major improvements at problem junctions and, yes, dualling the entire road.

"There is also a political case to be made. When the £11 billion lower Thames crossing gets the nod ahead of the A1, and when the London to Birmingham High Speed 2 line costs as much as the GDP of Belarus, my constituents might be inclined to suspect that, just occasionally, there is a north-south divide.

"Northern Powerhouse Rail and the TransPennine route upgrade are great, welcome projects, and I am genuinely pleased for the people who live in those parts of the country, but what about infrastructure in the true north of England? If we are serious about devolution and unlocking regional economies, and I think we are, the A1 is the place to start.

“It is a mess of overlapping problems that chokes the region’s potential, and that is why I am so pleased that we have secured the first substantial improvements in over 10 years following Labour’s investment earlier this year.

"Instead of a long-dangled but never delivered dualling for the south of the constituency, we will have necessary improvements from Morpeth to Berwick. But I want to go further. My expectation is simple: a safer A1, including dualling. All options should be on the table.

“If we are serious about devolution, I urge the Minister and the Government to apply these reformed Green Book rules and deliver maximum improvements on the A1.”

He was backed by fellow Labour MPs Joe Morris (Hexham) and Mary Glindon (Newcastle East and Wallsend).

Berwickshire MP John Lamont, Conservative, said the A1 was ‘simply not good enough for a road of such national importance’ and said Labour’s decision to abandon the proposed dualling project was ‘short-sighted’.

"Anyone who regularly travels along the single-carriageway sections of the A1 understands the risks caused by heavy traffic and slow-moving vehicles, and the limited opportunities to overtake safely,” he said. “Minor alterations and isolated safety measures are not a substitute for the substantial upgrade that the route requires. This should not be treated as an English project or a Scottish project: it is a United Kingdom infrastructure project.”

In response, Simon Lightwood Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport) said: “I do not underestimate the disappointment that many constituents felt following the Government’s decision not to proceed with the A1 Morpeth and Ellingham dualling scheme, given that we inherited a number of unfunded capital commitments from the previous Government.

“The proposal to dual the A1 between Morpeth and Ellingham has been under development for many years. During that period, considerable work was undertaken – consultation took place, design options were developed and statutory powers were ultimately secured. The Government recognise that many local people view the scheme as an opportunity to improve connectivity, support economic growth and address concerns about safety and the reliability of the route.

"However, Governments have a responsibility to make decisions based not only on ambition, but on evidence and affordability and the prudent use of public funds.

“When Ministers reviewed the portfolio of strategic road schemes in 2024, really difficult choices had to be made across the transport network. The evidence presented showed that the Morpeth to Ellingham scheme represented a comparatively weak value-for-money proposition when assessed against competing investment priorities."

On changes to the Green Book, he continued: “I do not want to raise unrealistic expectations: the Government have not reversed their decision regarding the Morpeth to Ellingham dualling scheme, nor am I announcing a replacement major capital programme.

"However, that does not mean that nothing will happen. National Highways has continued assessing safety-focused options, and future proposals will be considered in the normal way for RIS4, taking into account evidence, affordability, deliverability and value for money, and any future improvements will be subject to viability and funding considerations within future investment programmes.

“I take this matter extremely seriously, and I will continue this conversation to see what we can achieve to provide a positive outcome for road users in both the short and longer terms.”