Railways Bill

Debate between Adam Dance and Chris Hinchliff

Report stage
Wednesday 10th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)]

This is a very significant piece of legislation. I have tabled a number of amendments that I believe would strengthen it even further, but in the time available I will focus on the issue that is without doubt the top priority for my constituents when it comes to rail reform: cutting fares, through amendment 32.

Thirty years of the railways being run for shareholder profit has left British commuters with some of the highest fares in Europe and taxpayers shelling out more in subsidies than it cost to run a public service for the pleasure. It really was the worst of all worlds. When something basic that people need to live their daily lives, such as getting to work or school, visiting family or seeing a doctor, is treated as a commercial enterprise, what should be a service that facilitates our lives degenerates into a way of squeezing as much profit out of people as possible. When people are more or less turned into human cash machines just to get around, it is no wonder that extortionate fares put so many people off using the railways altogether, and I am sure that we have all seen the mind-numbingly bonkers stories of instances where it has been cheaper to fly to Europe than to get a train from London to one of our great northern cities.

This is what happens when essential public transport is handed over to private capital in a sector where real competition cannot function. For too long, our ability to get around reliably and affordably has come second to extracting profit for shareholders, and we see similarly infuriating failures with our water and energy, too. Taking back control of our railways means that we can rewrite the rules so that they work for ordinary people at long last.

I pay credit to the Labour Government for getting us here, but it is now vital that we grasp the opportunities presented by public ownership and use that control to make rail travel more efficient and accessible for all and, crucially—I turn here to my amendment 32—more affordable. Ultimately, we must always keep in mind that it will not wash to just tell the public that nationalisation has made our railways better; they need to feel it in their pocket. The good will for a different way of doing things is undeniable. The public overwhelmingly support the principle of public ownership, but that support will vanish if fares continue to rise.

My amendment proposes a Great British Railways railcard, our own version of the schemes in Germany, Switzerland and Belgium. Instead of a morass of wildly varying fares, discounts based specifically on age or other characteristics, and schemes that almost seem deliberately designed by some fiendish mind determined to catch passengers out with validity only on certain routes and at specific times, amendment 32 would give every resident in the UK the right to a railcard offering substantially reduced fares on all rail travel, whatever their age, whatever the route and whatever the time of day.

The best signal we could send to the public as we take over the railways is to use some of the savings from reduced waste and management costs and ending profit flowing out of the system to bring down fares. Seven in 10 Brits—a full 70%—say that the Government should wholly reinvest the savings from ending rail privatisation into cutting fares or opening new rail services.

For decades now, the cost of existence in this country has been killing off hope and the chance to embrace so much of what makes life worth living, with death by a thousand costs. Energy bills are too high, rents are out of control and council tax goes up and up. We have to pull every lever available to us across every part of Government to lift the weight of the cost of living crisis, so that everyone can afford the basics of daily life without facing the constant stress and struggle of scraping by. For a key worker who schlepps into work each day on a train, or for a disabled person or pensioner heading for multiple medical appointments a month, knocking 25% or even 50% off their travel costs would make a profound difference to ensuring that the sums added up at the end of the month.

Cheaper fares would benefit millions of people, from those at the sharpest end struggling to put food on the table to the squeezed middle who feel like the helping hand of Government is always reserved for someone else. Rail fares are a crucial way of showing that a Labour Government are on the side of all those people—a benefit to all and a loss to none. I believe that my amendment 32 is a chance to show tangibly, in a way that reaches across generations, geography and traditional political loyalties, that Labour values mean more money in your pocket.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for keeping us on time and on track—much better than some of the trains I have travelled on.

I will speak in favour of new clause 1, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover), and amendment 55, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke). When the Government came into office with a promise to do something about the shocking state of our trains, people back in Yeovil all said, “Finally—it’s about time”, which happens also to be what they say if the train eventually shows up. There is a lot to welcome in the Bill, but it needs to go further if we are to address the problems with rail travel in Somerset.

Luckily enough, us pesky Liberal Democrats have some ideas that the Government can support today. Our passenger charter and our amendments would provide a range of guarantees that would address the challenges that people in Yeovil face when trying to get a train. They would back up those guarantees with a framework for compensation for failures to comply with the charter, such as delay repay. Our charter’s guarantee about value for money would mean that apprentices such as Gregg would not be priced out of rail travel. He worked out that currently it would cost him £5,200 for an annual train ticket to Exeter—a quarter of his salary—instead of £1,750 if he lift-shares with a friend. We can see why people do not use the trains at the moment.

Our charter guarantee of proper seating for any single part of a rail journey longer than 30 minutes will mean that something finally has to be done about the overcrowding on trains from Yeovil junction, which makes travel for people like Colin a nightmare, even when they get off their train and try to get the next one. Only the other day, I was chatting to a disabled passenger on the overcrowded train to London, and she told me that if she wants a seat, she has to fork out lots more money for first-class tickets to have the peace of mind that she will not have to stand. Our charter calls for proper services, including good wi-fi, clean toilets, and catering—and a few plugs would help. It would also mean that long journeys should not be an uncomfortable nightmare.

The charter guarantee on the reliability of services, and amendment 55’s requirements for better links between rail travel and onward transport, such as buses or active travel, will mean that people like Janine will be able to use Yeovil junction more reliably. At the minute, a lack of bus services means that when trains are late, people miss the bus and are forced to wait ages to get home, or they have to fork out for a pricey taxi. Hopefully, we will also get a safe active travel route to Yeovil junction.

Finally, our charter’s guarantee relates to improving the accessibility of trains, stations, the areas around stations and replacement services. It will force more action to support disabled passengers in rural areas because this is a real issue in Yeovil. Staff shortages and a lack of proper training have seen both Jack, a wheelchair user, and Kathy, who is visually impaired, suffer accidents at Yeovil Pen Mill. As Kathy points out, at the moment things are only getting worse, with staff retiring after years of service and GWR not hiring replacements beforehand. Jack even described to me how she was made to feel responsible for her accident, because she needed to use a ramp. That is not good enough and not acceptable at all.

Our charter makes it clear as day that accessibility is the responsibility of Great British Railways, not passengers. I hope the Government will listen and take on board our ideas, because we need this Bill to succeed if we are to get the trains working for people in Yeovil again.