The Secretary of State for Transport (Louise Haigh) With
permission, Mr Speaker, I shall make a statement about rail
performance. I welcome the shadow Secretary of State for Transport,
the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), to his place. I am
sure the Opposition will be interested in what we have to update
the House about this afternoon. After 14 years of neglect, our
inheritance was a railway that was failing its passengers, with
cancellations at a 10-year high and...Request free trial
The Secretary of State for Transport ()
With permission, Mr Speaker, I shall make a statement about rail
performance. I welcome the shadow Secretary of State for
Transport, the hon. Member for Orpington (), to his place. I am sure the
Opposition will be interested in what we have to update the House
about this afternoon.
After 14 years of neglect, our inheritance was a railway that was
failing its passengers, with cancellations at a 10-year high and
punctuality that is consistently inconsistent across the network.
Back in 2015, cancellations represented around 2% of all
services, but thanks to our inheritance of extraordinary failure,
that doubled to 4% when the last Government left office. The
situation is holding back our economy, stifling our businesses
and making life miserable for passengers. That is why, as part of
this Government's public service reform agenda, we are pushing
ahead with the biggest overhaul of our railways in more than 30
years. I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity to
update the House on the progress we are making.
As Members will be aware, the Passenger Railway Services (Public
Ownership) Bill is making its way through the other place. It
will allow the Government to give three months' notice to the
first private train operating company to be taken into public
ownership, which we will announce as soon as Royal Assent has
been achieved. No one has ever pretended that public ownership
alone is a silver bullet. The people impacted by delays and
cancellations, who can no longer rely on the train to get where
they need to, do not care who owns the trains—they care whether
they are working or not. Under the model we inherited, no one
could argue that they were working, so we will soon launch our
consultation setting out plans for unification across the
railway.
As part of that, Great British Railways, as the single directing
mind, will plan services on a whole-system basis, to better
deliver for passengers and freight customers, unlock growth and
provide the services a modern, efficient railway should. That
will lay the groundwork for the introduction of the railways
Bill, later this Session, which will establish Great British
Railways and end the fragmentation that has hampered our railways
for over 30 years of privatisation.
But we do not want to wait for legislation. The Government are
already making improvements and taking steps to deliver reform
across the railways. I have appointed Laura Shoaf as chair of
shadow Great British Railways, bringing together Network Rail,
the publicly owned train operating companies and my Department to
drive better integration now. Working with operators already in
public ownership, we are seeking to drive savings by eliminating
duplication and deliver the improvements that passengers want,
such as allowing tickets to be accepted across those TOCs in
public ownership during disruption.
Shadow GBR gives us the tools to assess the structure of the
timetable, question resource plans and review performance
measures and targets. We are using those tools to unlock the
punctuality and reliability that passengers deserve across the
country. For example, Southeastern is now performing much better.
Its cancellations are low, with its punctuality ranking among the
top five operators contracted to my Department, and that level of
service will increase by 44 additional trains per day when the
timetable is updated in December. That is what shadow Great
British Railways is delivering now.
We are demonstrating what integration between track and train can
deliver for passengers. Take those who rely on Euston station,
for example. Indecision on HS2 left passengers with fewer
platforms and greater overcrowding, victims of the so-called
“Euston dash”. Convening Network Rail and train operators at
Euston in the interest of passengers is an excellent example of
the benefits that our reform agenda can achieve. Euston now not
only has an integrated station management team, but a 100-day
plan of rapid improvements that puts the interests of passengers
first and individual organisations second. Platform announcements
are made earlier, crowding has been reduced and, yes, the
advertising screen has been temporarily switched off.
Delays and cancellations were not the only inheritance. For two
years, strike followed strike, and disruption followed
disruption, in the longest industrial dispute on our railways. I
have made it my priority to get around the table, reversing the
previous Government's antagonistic approach by resetting
industrial relations and settling the pay disputes that saw the
country grinding to a halt. I am working with the sector to speed
up training and accelerate the driver recruitment pipeline, which
will reduce the railway's reliance on rest day working agreements
and lower the burden on taxpayers. Settling this saga allows us
to move forward with long-overdue negotiations on workforce
reform, bringing our railways into the 21st century. That is what
moving fast and fixing things looks like.
We are putting passengers first and, today, I can inform the
House that since the resolution of the LNER driver dispute, we
have seen green shoots emerging, with the number of LNER
cancellations falling. Not only have cancellations due to a lack
of driver resource dropped to near zero as a direct consequence
of getting around the table with unions, but revenue is £15
million higher for the recent rail periods this year versus the
same periods last year. Overall cancellations are down from 7% to
5%, and LNER has run 100 more train services in the last four
weeks than in the comparable period last year.
Elsewhere, passengers will see a tangible impact on reliability
on Northern Rail trains. Thanks to our agreement on rest day
working, hundreds more driver shifts have been covered this
weekend, cutting cancellations now and in the long run. At
TransPennine Express, operator-caused, on-the-day cancellations
averaged around 2% in the last year, compared to 5% in the year
before it was taken into public ownership. On CrossCountry, we
took immediate steps to implement a remedial plan to reduce its
cancellations and get services back on track. Its reduced
timetable has brought greater stability, and I expect even
greater reliability in the long term as the full timetable
returns today.
Those are early signs of what happens when a Government get a
grip and put passengers at the heart of decision making.
Resetting industrial relations is already having a direct impact
on better services, but it will take time to pass all the
benefits on to passengers. We have to be clear-eyed about the
problems, but we are committed to full transparency. I can
announce today that we will be fully transparent with passengers
by displaying performance data at stations to demonstrate how the
railway is working and to allow the public to hold us to account
as we deliver change. That is important, because the railway is a
promise—a promise to passengers from the moment they buy a ticket
that the train will arrive on time, as the timetable says.
While there are encouraging signs, I am not naive to the reality
that passengers will see only a broken promise so long as the
departure board shows trains delayed and services cancelled. That
is why I have approached the situation with the urgency it
demands, including focusing on performance today; bringing
together industry to make it clear that improvements that can be
made now must be made now; and using every tool at our disposal
to drive improvements as fast as possible.
At the same time, the root of the problem grows deeper. Decades
of muddled decision making have left the railway fragmented. We
have tolerated an unworkable system of track in one organisation
and trains in another for decades too long. This Government will
turn the page on that chapter of fragmentation. I have wasted no
time in kick-starting the long-term reform that our railway
desperately needs. We have wasted no time in bringing train
operating companies under public ownership. As today's figures
show, we have wasted no time in getting around the table with
unions and making change happen now. That is what moving fast and
fixing things looks like, and I commend this statement to the
House.
(Orpington) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and for sharing
an advance copy. I agree that rail performance is a key concern
to passengers throughout the country, and it is a fair criticism
to say that several operators have consistently underperformed.
That is why, when we were in government, we took action to
improve performance on our railways, investing more than £100
billion to operate and enhance our railways since 2010, and
electrifying more than 1,200 miles of track—compared to just 63
miles under the last Labour Government.
I am glad that the Government are taking forward the framework
offered in the previous Conservative Government's Williams-Shapps
review. Having a more joined-up rail network should indeed
deliver key improvements. However, it is disappointing that the
Government have progressed with their plans for the effective
nationalisation of the rail operators by ending private rail
operator franchising, despite all the evidence pointing to the
fact that that will be contrary to the aim of improving rail
performance.
We know that while in some cases it has been necessary in the
short term to bring rail operators into public control, it has
not made the difference in performance that the Government would
have us believe. It takes only a cursory glance at passenger rail
performance statistics to see that some of the rail operators
operating under public control have done little or nothing to
improve cancellations or delays in relation to other operators.
For example, the Secretary of State mentioned TransPennine
Express and a decrease in cancellations since the operator was
taken into public ownership, but she made no reference to delays.
Data from the Office for Rail and Road show that in the four
years prior to the train operator coming under public control,
passengers faced an average of 8,130 delay minutes per month.
From period 2 of 2023-24, when the operator was brought into
public ownership, up to period 4 of 2024-25, average monthly
delays have increased by 1,677 minutes, to 9,807 a month. In
addition, for the year '23-24, data shows that train operators
run by private companies in England had an average on time rate
of 64.36%. For train operators in public control, by contrast,
the average was 57.7%—a difference of just under seven percentage
points.
Public ownership is not the panacea that the right hon. Lady
claims, so it is disingenuous for the Government to argue that
wholesale public control of rail operation will do everything to
improve performance, particularly for operators that are already
performing well. Under the Government's plans to end private rail
operator franchising, the first contracts set to expire and be
picked up by the Government are some of the highest performing
franchises. The Government risk making the mistake of taking
credit for comparatively strong performance, which will occur not
as a result of their measures but as a result of the successes of
the previous private franchising. That would mean the Government
drawing the wrong conclusions from their actions, and it would
have implications for future decision making.
It should be appreciated that the role of open access operators
has been one of the greatest success stories within our rail
network. It is therefore incumbent on the Government to provide
greater clarity to the sector on how their plans for the rail
network will impact on open access operators. It is also
essential that the Secretary of State finally clarifies the
long-term plan for rolling stock under the Government's
measures.
I appreciate that in Labour's brave new world, all decisions are
reflected through the ideological prism of “public good, private
bad”, but there is a fundamental risk that the Government are
taking ideological action to the long-term detriment of rail
performance. Among our counterparts in Europe, it is widely
acknowledged that rail privatisation has been successful in
increasing passenger numbers, encouraging investment and
controlling costs. In Italy, for example, prices have reduced by
31%, and Austria has witnessed a 41% increase in service
frequency. There is a serious risk that the Government's plans
will take us backwards on those key areas without offering any
promise of improvement on performance, or improved journeys or
fares for passengers.
We all fully acknowledge the difficulties facing our railways,
and nobody should accept poor performance —we have,
unfortunately, seen that in some areas of our network—but merely
enacting demonstrative but counterintuitive measures designed to
communicate action is no substitute for making measured and
pragmatic choices. For example, the Government and the Secretary
of State have chosen to offer inflation-busting pay rises with no
working practice reform in exchange. Without substantial working
practice reform, it is deeply unlikely that the cost of the pay
deals will be offset by improved performance, and the failure to
introduce working practice reform will mean continued performance
difficulties on our railways.
Can the Secretary of State offer a guarantee today that ending
private rail franchising without implementing working practice
reform will lead to demonstrably improved performance? If she
cannot offer that guarantee, the Government should shelve the
ideology and take a step back to pause and examine whether their
package of measures will truly improve rail performance. It
surely makes more sense to learn from the performance statistics;
to understand from the experience of the continent and our past
the improvements that the private sector can bring; and to
prioritise the practical over the ideological.
I am grateful to the shadow Secretary of State for acknowledging
that we provided the statement in advance, and I suggest that
next time he reads it before he responds. He will have heard me
say that public ownership is not a silver bullet, hence why we
are setting out a substantial package of reforms. As I also
mentioned, that includes substantial workforce reform, including
developing training policies—that is one of the ways in which the
recruitment of drivers has been really held back—and reducing
reliance on rest day working agreements.
The shadow Minister might also want to check the latest
statistics on TransPennine Express. It had the largest increase
in punctuality of any operator contracted to my Department,
including all those in private ownership. We have been clear that
open access should continue where it does not abstract revenue
from the overall network and where there is capacity. There have
been good examples, such as Lumo and Grand Central, and we are
very happy to continue working with them. We will publish a
long-term rolling stock plan in due course.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call the Chair of the Transport Committee.
(Brentford and Isleworth)
(Lab)
The Transport Secretary's statement is hugely welcome. Bringing
privately owned train operating companies into public ownership
as well as setting up GBR will inevitably add to her Department's
workload, so what preparations is she making to manage that
additional workload?
I am grateful that my hon. Friend is concerned about my work-life
balance—so am I. We are staffing up the operator of last resort,
as it is currently known—we will shortly change its name, as it
will no longer be the operator of last resort—and the Department
has significantly increased its capability. Under the previous
Administration, no one in government took responsibility for the
running of the railways. We are taking a very deliberately
different approach and, as passengers-in-chief, we will ensure
that both the operator of last resort and the Department are
sufficiently staffed up to manage the quick and successful
transition of franchises into public ownership.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Mr (Wimbledon) (LD)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of her
statement. I also welcome the new shadow Secretary of State, the
hon. Member for Orpington (), to his position.
The Lib Dems welcome the Secretary of State's statement that
performance is improved, and commuters and businesses are
relieved that industrial action has been curtailed. It is
disappointing, however, that the unions were not required to
agree any meaningful improvements to productivity as part of the
settlement. Clearly, we are not yet out of the woods—or perhaps I
should say the tunnel. Under the Conservatives, delays,
cancellations and overcrowding became commonplace. Last year,
more than 55,000 rush hour trains were either partly or fully
cancelled—a 10% rise on the previous year, and the worst of any
year since 2019. Although the latest news is welcome, there are
many miles left to go on this journey. The Government's policy of
nationalisation is, as the Secretary of State herself concedes,
no silver bullet. Earlier this year, the Office of Rail and Road
found that four of the eight least reliable operators, with the
highest cancellation rates, were public, while the three most
reliable operators, with the lowest cancellation rates, were
private.
I have three questions for the Secretary of State. First, what
steps is she taking to ensure that the worst, rather than the
best, private operators are nationalised first? Secondly, where a
private operator's performance is of a higher standard than that
in the public sector, will she consider extending its contract?
Finally, given the still shocking level of accessibility on much
of the network, will she urgently provide an update on when the
stalled Access for All programme will be back on track?
To confirm, we are working with the trade unions at the moment on
productivity improvements. We are clear that some of the
practices in place on the railways are not acceptable or fit for
modern and efficient railways. In the pay deal, there was a side
letter and agreement to work through training improvements, and
we want to ensure that that is delivered. The previous
Government's approach meant that they not only failed to deliver
any workforce reform improvements, but presided over the longest
industrial dispute in our railways' history, costing the taxpayer
and passengers hundreds of millions of pounds.
The hon. Gentleman is right to point out that cancellations are
high in the publicly owned TOCs. That is a result not least of
the fact that the ones that are in public ownership were already
the worst performing, and we need to look at how they have
improved under public ownership. The real benefits will be
brought about under Great British Railways, when we will be truly
able to integrate track and train and deliver those improvements.
We will set out the schedule for bringing the private TOCs into
public ownership once Royal Assent has been given to the
Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill, but the right
balance must be struck between performance and return for the
taxpayer, because we are spending hundreds of millions of pounds
in dividend payouts and management fees.
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to mention the Access for
All programme and accessibility, which has not been good enough
under Network Rail. I am happy to write to him about specific
stations in the programme.
Dr (Ealing Central and Acton)
(Lab)
Everyone is praising my right hon. Friend to the heavens now that
High Speed 2 will end at Euston. She is welcome to Old Oak Common
in my constituency any time to have a look-see at progress there.
However, can she help to fix the daily delays that constituents
are facing on Crossrail? West Ealing and Acton Main Line are
getting a worse service than they were before all this. We want
to build, build, build, but people in new homes need to be able
to travel.
The day when everyone is praising me to the heavens on HS2 is one
I look forward to. As my hon. Friend knows, brand-new Elizabeth
line trains are on order; the Mayor of London was awarded a £485
million capital settlement in the Budget partly for those trains,
which are being produced at Alstom in Derby. That will
significantly reduce the overcrowding and delays that she talks
about. The Department works with the Mayor of London very closely
on addressing those delays.
Dame (West Worcestershire)
(Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for coming to the House and
updating us, because it gives her an opportunity to correct the
record. She may have inadvertently misled the House at the last
Transport questions about the Birmingham to Hereford line and
West Midlands Railways' performance. Back in May, a terrible one
in 10 of those services was being cancelled, but by October when
Transport questions took place, one in six Birmingham to Hereford
services was being cancelled. Will the Secretary of State
commission her officials to talk to representatives from West
Midlands Railways about that line, and find a way to move fast
and fix that service?
Either the Rail Minister or I will of course seek to meet
representatives of West Midlands Trains to address its
performance.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call Select Committee member .
(Birmingham Northfield)
(Lab)
The shadow Secretary of State said that we should pay attention
to performance statistics. The figures that I have obtained from
the Department show that over the past seven years, there was a
35% increase in temporary and emergency speed restrictions on the
network. The Secretary of State has a difficult inheritance, but
can she set out for us the work that she is doing to refocus the
industry on the hard graft of understanding, maintaining and
improving our crumbling infrastructure?
Shadow Great British Railways brings together the Department,
Network Rail, and those operators that are already in public
ownership to look at integration and ensure that our investment
in the network delivers improvements for passengers as quickly
and efficiently as possible. That work will absolutely cover
maintaining the network, and we will set out how we will do so in
the next control period, as we look towards the second phase of
the spending review.
(Oxford West and Abingdon)
(LD)
I welcome the gusto with which the Secretary of State approaches
her work, and in particular her motto, which is “Move fast and
fix things.” Has she spoken to Network Rail recently? Its motto
seems to be “Move slow and break things”, at least in Oxford,
given the way it has mismanaged the Oxford train station upgrade.
For the second Christmas in a row, businesses along the Botley
Road will not be open. We have a meeting later this week with
those businesses, and I have asked for a meeting with the Rail
Minister, but he seems too busy. Would the Secretary of State
give me just a moment of her time, so that I can work with her on
how we can move forward? This is not acceptable, is it?
I completely empathise, and agree that the situation in Oxford is
not good enough. The hon. Lady's characterisation of Network Rail
is partly why it is being abolished as we establish Great British
Railways. I will of course meet her to discuss how we can improve
the situation.
(Luton South and South
Bedfordshire) (Lab)
I welcome the Transport Secretary's comments today, and her
emphasis on good industrial relations in the rail industry. Why
does she think that this Labour Government were able to work with
trade unions such as ASLEF to end the national strikes, improving
services for passengers within weeks of taking office, when the
previous Conservative Government were unable to do so over
several years?
The truth is that the previous Government deliberately provoked
and prolonged that strike, the longest in the history of our
railways. They budgeted for a pay settlement not far off where we
landed, and that pay settlement has already paid for itself
through increased revenue and improved services for
passengers.
Greg (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Chiltern Railways was absent from the Secretary of State's
statement, but when it comes to rail performance, for my
constituents —both those on the Chiltern main line and those on
the Aylesbury branch—daily overcrowding is a reality, with
passengers often being left on the platform. Given that the
previous Government stepped up, with a commitment to ensuring
that Chiltern got more rolling stock to tackle the overcrowding
challenges, will the Secretary of State make it a double priority
to get Chiltern those extra trains and end this overcrowding?
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. Chiltern was the
worst-performing operator last year, in terms of the reduction in
punctuality, which further makes the case for public ownership.
The previous Government made lots of commitments, few of which
were funded, but I will take that question away and determine
where the rolling stock order is.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call Select Committee member .
(Derby North) (Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State's success in ending national
industrial disputes as a first step to delivering better services
for rail passengers. Does she agree that the establishment of
Great British Railways in Derby represents a further positive
step in getting Britain moving again? Can she update the House on
the governance framework for shadow Great British Railways, and
how it will work with stakeholders on functions such as producing
a business plan?
I was delighted to be in Derby recently to confirm that the
headquarters of Great British Railways will be in that rail city.
I am also delighted that, as I say, Alstom is manufacturing the
new Elizabeth line trains, as a consequence of funding awarded in
the Budget. Shadow GBR is really important for engaging with
stakeholders and, crucially, putting passengers at the heart of
developing a new culture—and a new organisation, in Great British
Railways. It has the expert chairing of Laura Shoaf, who brings
substantial planning and transport experience from her time as
chief executive of West Midlands combined authority.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call Select Committee member Rebecca .
Rebecca (South West Devon) (Con)
It has recently been brought to my attention that in Great
Western Railway, which serves my constituency in Devon, drivers
do not have contracts that ensure a seven-day-a-week service—the
contracts do not include Sundays, so trains are regularly
cancelled. In fact, four trains were cancelled yesterday, so one
lady had been forced to catch the first train today instead. What
plans does the Secretary of State have to equalise driver
contracts under Great British Railways, to ensure that routes
such as Paddington to Devon are fully staffed seven days a week,
so that she can fulfil her promise to passengers?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right, and unfortunately that is the
picture across too much of our railways. The workforce terms and
conditions are simply not fit for purpose. Part of our
inheritance is that we do not have a workforce that can deliver a
modern and efficient railway. We are working with Great Western
Railway to address that egregious issue, and we will come back to
the House shortly to set out our progress.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call Select Committee member Dr .
Dr (Edinburgh South West)
(Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and for the
leadership that she is showing to get our railways back on
track—sorry for the pun. I am pleased that she mentioned LNER and
Lumo, which do a fantastic job of connecting Edinburgh and
London, and of providing a stress-free alternative to flying.
When she first took up her post, she was clear that she wanted
HS2 to get a grip of costs. Does she feel vindicated, given the
reports over the weekend of more than £100 million being spent on
a single structure, despite some of those involved saying that
they were not aware of the need for it?
It was extraordinarily frustrating to see the news of the obscene
amounts of money spent on that structure to do with HS2. That
happened under HS2's previous leadership. We are resolving this
by bringing in Mark Wild imminently to lead the organisation, and
we are also resolving issues around cost control and governance
through James Stewart's governance review of HS2. These things
happened under the previous Government, and fortunately the
electorate resolved that issue for us on 4 July.
(Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
After a weekend of cancellations at Windermere, Oxenholme and
elsewhere, will the Secretary of State have a word with Northern
Rail, to remind it that it is meant to run a rail service on a
Sunday? Will she also speak to Avanti —many hon. Members may
agree with me on this and have the same experience—because
services from London Euston to Glasgow Central are habitually
stopped at Preston, even when the track is clear all the way to
the Scottish border and beyond? It harms my constituents at
Oxenholme, and those in Penrith, Lancaster and Carlisle.
I have routine conversations with Northern Rail, as the hon.
Gentleman would imagine. The most recent was on Thursday. We
facilitated a new rest day working agreement with it, which has
significantly reduced driver cancellations, but there is an
outstanding issue with conductors; there is a very similar
situation with Great Western. In parts of Northern Rail,
particularly in the north-west, Sundays are not included in the
working week. That has led to an unacceptable amount of
cancellations, which we are working to resolve. I will raise the
issue of stopping at Preston with Avanti separately.
(Doncaster Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
Doncaster has a long and historic relationship with the railways;
we are home to both the Mallard and the Flying Scotsman. The
financial sustainability and success of rail are critical to our
local economy, so can the Secretary of State update the House on
the net cost of the solution that she brokered to end the
strikes?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The strikes were costing us
£20 million a day in lost revenue. That is aside from the
economic impact of people coming off the railways and not making
journeys to work, to see friends and family or to visit other
towns and cities. Settling the pay disputes that were pervading
our railways has already paid for itself.
Dr (South West Wiltshire)
(Con)
What lessons has the Secretary of State drawn from rail networks
in other countries about rail performance and safety, given that
many of them are now automated? Will she make herself a heroine
in the south-west by dealing at long last with the notorious
Tisbury loop, west of Salisbury, which has added inestimable time
to rail journeys to the far south-west? The situation could be
resolved at very little cost.
I will look into the issue for the right hon. Gentleman. It may
be that the Rail Minister has to make himself a hero; I will ask
him to meet the right hon. Gentleman to discuss the matter.
Mr (York Outer) (Lab)
They say that money doesn't grow on trees, but apparently it
flies out the window for £100 million bat caves. Does my right
hon. Friend agree that HS2 should apologise for its fur-brained
scheme? How can we quickly learn the lessons to ensure good
taxpayer value for money as HS2 continues?
I was absolutely horrified, on entering the Department, to learn
that there had been no routine ministerial oversight, in any
sense of the word, of HS2 for some time. We immediately
established a cross-ministerial taskforce, comprising me and the
Treasury, to oversee HS2's costs. I have written to the chair to
make it clear that, beyond safety, his first and abiding priority
is to bring down costs. I have commissioned a governance review,
led by James Stewart. We will look at the structure of HS2 Ltd,
which has been too much at arm's length, and too free to spend
taxpayers' money for too long.
(Bath) (LD)
GWR, which serves my Bath constituency, has been performing in
the most disappointing way, to say the least. Especially on
Sundays, cancellations and delays are the new norm. Engineering
works are among the problems, but the train driver shortage is
the biggest problem. What exactly will resolving what the
Secretary of State calls the rest day working issue mean for my
constituents? When does she expect them to see tangible
change?
The problem across the entire railway is that we do not have
sufficient drivers or staff, so too many parts of the railways
are reliant on rest day working agreements. We should not have to
rely on people volunteering to come on shift in order to run a
Sunday service, but unfortunately that is the case at Great
Western Railway. We will not be harmonising contracts or terms
and conditions at Great British Railways, as we have established,
but we need to get drivers and conductors on modern terms and
conditions that reflect the railway that we need. We are
attempting to address the specific issue at Great Western
Railway; as I say, we will come back to the House soon with an
update on progress.
(Dartford) (Lab)
At a recent meeting with me to discuss rail improvements for my
constituents, the chief executive of Southeastern—a nationalised
company, as has been confirmed—was able to confirm that
additional services between Dartford and central London are due
to commence in December, as the Secretary of State mentioned. Can
she outline any additional welcome improvements to services in
the south-east, or other parts of the country, to which we can
look forward?
We will see 44 additional trains per day on the new timetable
from Southeastern. CrossCountry restored its full timetable
today, and we hope to see new timetables from TransPennine
Express in the coming weeks. We have procurements out for
TransPennine Express and Southeastern, I believe, so my hon.
Friend will see new rolling stock in due course.
(Spelthorne) (Con)
People can only go so far out of London into the Spelthorne
constituency on their Oyster card; they have to buy a train
ticket for the last couple of stops. This anomalous situation
means that major employers such as BP and Shepperton Studios send
buses up the line to pick up their workers to do a day's work.
The Secretary of State will soon be the proud owner of South
Western Railway, Transport for London and Great British Railways,
so can she please make herself an absolute hero in Spelthorne and
get it into the Oyster zone?
The Mayor of London is the owner of Transport for London, but we
can absolutely work together to see whether anything of that
nature can be achieved. I see no reason why we cannot make
progress on that issue.
(Hitchin) (Lab)
Commuters at Arlesey and Hitchen stations in my constituency are
driven to despair by the shocking state of Thameslink services,
with delays and cancellations an all too frequent feature of
everyday commutes. I welcome the urgency with which the Secretary
of State is starting to tackle the long-term causes, from
industrial disputes to fragmentation. In the interim, will she
meet me to discuss how we can push Thameslink to do more to make
sure we finally make these delays and cancellations a thing of
the past?
I am grateful for those comments. Govia Thameslink had an
improvement of 3% in its cancellations on last year, but it is
still falling behind on punctuality. I am happy to meet my hon.
Friend to discuss what more we can do.
(Moray West, Nairn and
Strathspey) (SNP)
I welcome the Secretary of State's update on how the UK
Government are following in the Scottish Government's footsteps
by nationalising train operating companies, but Labour cannot
claim to be nationalising the railways while leaving the trains
in private hands. Even with the passage of her Bill, profits will
continue to flow out of our railways to rolling stock companies,
some based in tax havens, rather than be reinvested in services
and infrastructure, and consequently in performance. Will the
Secretary of State set out when she plans to bring forward
proposals to nationalise the rolling stock companies and bring
the railways back into public hands in their entirety?
One of the purposes of this reform was to save the taxpayer
money, and bringing operators into public ownership as their
contracts expire means there will be no compensation. We will
also be saving the money currently leaking out of the system
through dividends and management fees. It would not be fiscally
prudent in the current environment to spend billions of pounds on
nationalising the rolling stock, so we will continue the current
arrangement whereby private finance is leveraged into rolling
stock companies.
(Bracknell) (Lab)
My constituents are reliant on a train line between Reading and
Waterloo that has seen no improvements to frequency or journey
times since the 1970s, so they will warmly welcome the steps the
Secretary of State has outlined today to launch a consultation
setting out plans for unification across the railway. Does she
agree that a modern railway system is an essential step in
getting our economy growing?
I absolutely agree. For too long, passengers have not been able
to rely on the railways, and it has driven people off them. We
see in the latest Transport Focus data that people are gradually
starting to feel more confident in using the railways, but we
have a long way to go to turn the tide on the last 14 years of
failure.
(Glastonbury and Somerton)
(LD)
Improved rail performance is of course welcome, but my
constituents in Somerton and Langport are not served by the
railway at all. A family in Curry Rivel recently wrote to me;
they are over half an hour away from the nearest train station,
leaving them isolated from the train line. Will the Minister
outline any plans she has to connect my constituents in rural
areas to the railway?
We will be setting out a long-term infrastructure strategy in
spring next year, working with the Ministry of Housing,
Communities and Local Government and colleagues across Government
to ensure that we are unlocking the transport infrastructure that
will be of benefit and allow us to meet our housing targets but
also improve rural connectivity. My Department is also reforming
how we do appraisals to ensure we maximise our investment in
transport infrastructure for economic growth and to tackle
socioeconomic inequality.
Mr (Leeds South West and Morley)
(Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State's decisive action to end
industrial action, get the railways moving again and unlock the
barriers to economic growth that we absolutely need to sweep away
to get this country growing again. It is particularly welcome to
hear about the green shoots of recovery and the improvements in
LNER's performance. However, passengers at Morley train station
tell me that the services are still unreliable, so can the
Secretary of State update the House on what she will do to
improve the reliability of the train services running through
Leeds South West and Morley and the rest of the UK?
LNER's reliability has improved in the past year, but I am not
naive and do not think we are there yet; these are only the green
shoots of recovery. The real improvements from these reforms will
come when we can truly integrate track and train. LNER and the
east coast are a perfect example of where the previous system was
failing. Billions of pounds were spent on upgrading the east
coast main line, but with absolutely no improvement for
passengers. By integrating track and train, we can ensure that
those upgrades to the east coast main line are fully realised for
passengers and that the timetable and service from LNER are
improved.
(Hazel Grove) (LD)
My constituents have to rely on two of the most unreliable train
operating companies: Northern and TransPennine Express. Too many
of them are having to drive to get to work on time or get a taxi
to get back in time for after-school club. When does the
Secretary of State think my constituents will have the confidence
to go back to using the train, rather than relying on an app on
their phone?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right. Northern and TransPennine
Express serve my constituency as well, and some of the most
deprived parts of the north of England. Performance has not been
good enough. TransPennine in particular has seen insignificant
improvements since it was brought into public ownership, but
neither operator is where it needs to be. We are working closely
with them as a priority through the operator of last resort, not
only to drive efficiencies, but crucially to drive performance. I
was struck when I met Network Rail and some of the managing
directors of the worst-performing operating companies that they
made it clear that the previous levels of performance had simply
been tolerated and accepted as normal across the industry. They
are under no doubt that under this Government, that level of
performance will no longer be tolerated.
(Calder Valley) (Lab)
My constituents in Calder Valley are also sick of the performance
of Northern Rail. In July, the Department for Transport issued a
breach of notice to Northern Rail, because of its
underperformance. Northern Rail's chief operating officer said
that performance was “not good enough”. Will my right hon. Friend
confirm that she will prioritise getting Northern Rail back on
track?
We can hear from the House how much of an impact the levels of
service on Northern Rail are having. Andy texts me every Monday about the
performance on Northern trains, so I can assure my hon. Friend
that it is a priority.
(Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
(PC)
Earlier this year, Avanti West Coast services on the north Wales
main line had on-the-day cancellations of more than 20%. Its
timetable is yet to return to pre-covid standards, and there were
no direct connections with London on Saturday. Given that the
Avanti West Coast contract runs to 2026, what is the Secretary of
State doing to ensure a reliable mainline service for the people
of north Wales?
My views on Avanti's performance are well known, I think. The
right hon. Lady is absolutely right that it has not been
acceptable. Shockingly, the way that national rail contracts were
written under the previous Government means that Avanti has not
defaulted. It is on a remedial plan to drive improvements, and we
have seen a small increase in punctuality, but it still has a
long way to go. We are watching over Avanti like a hawk to make
sure that if it does default, it can be immediately brought into
public ownership.
(Whitehaven and
Workington) (Lab)
I extend my thanks to the Secretary of State and the team for the
early action they have taken to improve the reliability of the
network. My constituents struggle with two lines. One is the
Cumbrian coast line, on which I ask the Secretary of State for
any update on the ongoing conductors' dispute. That is adding to
a lack of reliability in the system for those in Whitehaven and
Workington and elsewhere. I spend too much time—far too much
time—on Avanti West Coast services, which gives me the
opportunity to speak to constituents who cannot use the wi-fi,
because it is highly unreliable. It is a big issue for
productivity, so will the Secretary of State raise that with
Avanti when she meets its representatives?
Wi-fi is one of the examples of passenger experience that we are
clear needs to be delivered through Great British Railways. I
take East Midlands Railway, and the wi-fi is even worse on that
line. I would be happy to raise that issue with Avanti. We are in
the process of attempting to facilitate an agreement with
Northern on the conductor issue that my hon. Friend mentions in
the north-west, which has the most egregious example of working
terms and conditions being outside of a normal working week.
(Cheltenham) (LD)
I join the chorus of those talking about GWR's shocking Sunday
service. Its timetable is a work of fiction akin to
“Chuggington”, which I often watch with my daughter. Were that
the only problem that my constituents faced, we might be able to
look past it. However, the lack of carriages on trains home on a
weekday is a huge problem—my hon. Friend the Member for
Tewkesbury () recently used some choice
language about it, which I urge hon. Members to look up online; I
will not report it in the House. We often find that there are
only half the carriages that we need to get home. I recently
stood by the loo for 90 minutes until Stroud, which was an
unpleasant experience shared by many others on the train. What
will the Secretary of State do to reassure me that GBR will solve
that problem?
Again, the current fragmentation of the network means that we
have dozens of different types of rolling stock across the
network, all procured by different operators at different times,
which are not interoperable between operators and cannot be moved
around the network precisely when there are issues such as those
that the hon. Gentleman described. With the establishment of
Great British Railways and a long-term rolling stock strategy, we
can procure fewer types of trains and start to move them around.
I will take away the specific issue of short-form trains on Great
Western Railway and write to him about what action can be
taken.
Mr (Isle of Wight West)
(Lab)
rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
, can you confirm that you
were here at the beginning of the Secretary of State's
statement?
Mr Quigley
No, I was not.
(St Ives) (LD)
I welcome the Secretary of State's statement, and particularly
the sentiment about putting passengers first and getting a grip.
Those who are served by Great Western, which runs to south Wales
as well as down the main line to Penzance in my
constituency—Great Western has already been heavily criticised
this afternoon—will be aware that we are getting none of the
benefits of HS2 but a lot of the disruption as a result of the
work at Old Oak Common. Will the Secretary of State meet those
Members of Parliament who are worried about the prospect of six
years of sometimes severe disruption to their services to see
whether we can minimise the impact?
I am conscious of the disruption that will be experienced by
passengers coming from the south-west. We are putting in place
plans so that trains can come into Euston rather than Paddington,
but it is undeniable that there will be substantial disruption
during the Old Oak Common works. I or the Rail Minister will be
happy to meet colleagues who are affected.
Madam Deputy Speaker
I call Richard Quigley—honesty goes a long way.
Mr Quigley
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker; I truly am grateful. I was going
to say that my train was late, but that would not actually be
true. [Laughter.]
Speaking of my right hon. Friend being a heroine, finding a
solution to the Isle of Wight ferries issue would result in our
erecting a bronze statue on the seafront in Cowes. Does she agree
that the Conservatives' failed experiment with rail privatisation
has caused passengers misery and cost millions? What will she do
to make things better?
I am grateful to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for allowing my hon.
Friend to ask a question. I thought he would mention the ferries
as well—he also texts me often about the ferries. I am grateful
for his point. The new model will deliver not only better
services for passengers but a far better settlement for
taxpayers, who have been ripped off under the previous model for
far too long.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State very much for her statement. She
has been clear that transparency for passengers will be achieved
by displaying performance data. How do the Government intend to
ensure that, as well as knowing whether their local line is not
doing well, passengers know that their taxes are being used not
simply to pay rail staff higher wages, but to get trains to reach
their destinations in a time-effective and cost-effective
way?
The purpose of displaying performance data at stations is to give
passengers certainty and transparency about the state of the
railways, but Great British Railways will also be far more
accountable than under the current system. At the moment, to hold
the railways to account, there is a complicated mix of
responsibility between Network Rail, the train operating
companies and the Department for Transport. Great British
Railways will provide a single point of access to the railways
for politicians and for communities, and we will be able to
ensure that the organisation is single-mindedly delivering for
passengers.
|
