Three Suffolk MPs have raised concerns for "overdue improvements" to rail junctions as they rally the transport secretary to support upgrade works.

Leaders across the East of England have put forward '"the overwhelming case for investment" in Ely and Haughley Junctions to secretary of state for transport Grant Shapps.

Waveney MP and co-chair of the East of England All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) Peter Aldous said: "Decision time is fast approaching. Upgrading a very important transport route will help freight to and from Felixstowe Port.

"This will generate income for our local economy and help create more jobs in East Anglia."

Mr Aldous added: "Carrying out these improvements would also get more capacity into the rail network for passenger services."

Improvements to Ely Junction would benefit its five connecting lines to Ipswich, Norwich, Cambridge, Peterborough and Lynn.

A letter written to secretary of state for transport Grant Shapps highlighting the benefits of this work was co-signed by eight Members of Parliament, including Waveney MP Peter Aldous, West Suffolk MP Matt Hancock and South Suffolk MP James Cartlidge, as part of the East of England APPG.

In addition, it was also signed by chairman of the East of England Local Government Association Councillor Linda Haysey, chair of the UK Innovation Corridor Dame Ann Limb, chair of England's Economic Heartland Councillor Richard Wenham and chair of Transport East Councillor Kevin Bentley.

On Thursday, June 9, this group received a letter from minister for transport Wendy Morton in which she said the improvement plans had "strong alignment to the government's priorities", but that she was "considering the necessary changes to the national enhancement portfolio and some projects will have to be cancelled or indefinitely paused."

Responding to Ms Morton's letter, the East of England APPG emphasised that the majority of the benefits of investment in Ely Junction would be for freight transport which is projected for strong growth post-pandemic.

They also highlighted the possibility of a "potential and significant risk of non-compliance with Government policy, particularly the legally binding commitment to net zero by 2050".