Oral Answers to Questions
Huw Merriman Excerpts(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Alistair Strathern (Mid Bedfordshire) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
Mr Speaker, may I start by thanking you very much for bringing us all together at the carol concert yesterday, as you always do? I trust that this next hour will also be in keeping with the season of good will.
We are delivering record rail investment in the east of England, including upgrading the midland main line, a new station at Cambridge South, improvements at Ely and Horley junctions to increase passenger and freight capacity, and a new railway connecting eastern towns and cities to Oxford, which will deliver transformational growth across the region.
Alistair Strathern
Wixams new town in my constituency was built in the perfect location for rail connectivity, but over a decade after moving into their homes, residents are still waiting for a start date to be confirmed, let alone for a station to open. Will the Minister work with local stakeholders and Network Rail to get sign-off for that line and ensure that my residents can finally enjoy the rail connectivity that they were promised?
Huw Merriman
I am happy to give that commitment to work with the residents. Indeed, I recently spoke to the Mayor of Bedford on that exact point. We are working at pace to get the station delivered. There are also funding requirements that involve the local region, which have been agreed to previously, and we are keen to make progress.
Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con)
My hon. Friend has referred to the Horley junction and Ely junction developments, which came as very welcome news in October. The Horley junction development, in particular, is a very small project. It would be excellent to get a starting date agreed for next year, with the business case sorted out, recognising how that could improve resilience not only for passengers, but for freight and the port of Felixstowe.
Huw Merriman
My right hon. Friend has been an absolute champion for that project, as have other hon. Friends present. We are keen to make progress. The Secretary of State and I were very keen to see the project brought in, which was possible only because of the Prime Minister’s decisions on Network North in October. We are looking to make rapid progress on it, and I have heard my right hon. Friend’s call and will work to that speed.
Richard Foord (Tiverton and Honiton) (LD)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
The Government are committed to reforming the railways and ensuring that they are customer focused and commercially led, with the creation of Great British Railways to bring together infrastructure, operations and oversight of whole-industry finance. In the interim, the Department continues to hold the rail industry to account to deliver the punctual and reliable services that passengers and taxpayers deserve.
Richard Foord
In November last year, services on the west of England line out of London terminated at Axminster because of a land slip near Honiton. The same line has been closed for nine days this month, and passengers at Feniton are unable to travel to Exeter or London. Will the Minister ease the delays and cancellations for passengers in Honiton by dualling the track from Chard Junction to Axminster and adding a passing loop?
Huw Merriman
With the Prime Minister’s Network North commitment, £36 billion-worth of transport projects will be going ahead in other parts. I am happy to look at the project to which the hon. Gentleman refers. I should also mention that I am aware that there have been problems on the western and Wales routes, particularly those coming out of Paddington. The chief executive of Network Rail is also well aware of those problems and is taking action to ensure that we remedy the situation.
Stephen Crabb (Preseli Pembrokeshire) (Con)
So many families in Pembrokeshire have sons and daughters working away or studying all over the country who will want to get home this Christmas. With such poor rail services into Wales, what assurances has the Minister had from companies such as Great Western Railway that they will stop putting on five-carriage trains when they should be running 10 carriages; that they will have a full roster of drivers available in the days ahead, so that we can have a full complement of services running; and that services will not be cut short in places such as Swansea and Carmarthen, leaving my constituents stranded late at night?
Huw Merriman
My right hon. Friend makes a very good point. With Christmas eve and new year’s eve falling on Sundays this year, the team at GWR had to approach the Department because drivers were requesting additional payments for driving trains on those Sundays, as Sunday is still not part of a working seven-day week on the railway. We have delivered on that commitment, but the fundamental reform point remains: we need ASLEF and other trade unions to ensure that we have a modern railway that works seven days a week. I can give him an assurance that everything is being done, but a lot more could be done if we could reform with the unions’ co-operation.
Dan Jarvis (Barnsley Central) (Lab)
What role does the Northern Transport Acceleration Council have in Network North?
Huw Merriman
Being straight, transparent and open, I will write to the hon. Member and give him that detail, rather than attempt to make it up at Christmas time.
Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con)
Until fairly recently, Northern Trains provided a Saturdays-only service between Sheffield and Cleethorpes via Brigg. That has now changed to one train a day, five days a week, allowing people only an hour and a half to enjoy the shopping in Grimsby or the excellent resort of Cleethorpes. Could my hon. Friend look into this matter and contact me after speaking with Northern Trains?
Huw Merriman
Yes, I will do so. We have discussed that service before and are looking at a timetable alteration for the future. I will ensure that is looked at with my hon. Friend’s point very much in mind.
Gavin Newlands (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (SNP)
The Transport Committee, with which the Minister is fairly familiar, heard evidence last week that, thanks to the cancellation of HS2 phase 2 to Manchester and the inability of high-speed rolling stock to tilt on the remaining west coast main line track, journey times to and from Glasgow could actually increase by up to 24 minutes, even with the £50 billion Birmingham to London branch line complete. Does the Minister think that passengers in Scotland will see that as yet another Union connectivity dividend?
Huw Merriman
No, I do not agree. In fact, when that matter came up at the Public Accounts Committee, the official who works on HS2 was able to explain that, where trains tilt, they can do so at certain speeds on the west coast main line. However, that does not actually require a tilting train: any train can go at that speed, provided the speed is on the train. HS2 trains will also have faster acceleration, so I dispute the hon. Member’s point.
Mr Speaker
Some trains on the west coast main line would be more helpful, I think.
Simon Fell (Barrow and Furness) (Con)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
Northern is developing a final business case for a new fleet that will bring new trains to my hon. Friend’s route, and include options for greener technology such as batteries. We are also working with the Great British Railways transition team to assess options to decarbonise the whole network.
Simon Fell
I thank the Minister for his answer. He will be delighted to know that, for once, I am going to ask not about the quality of service on the Furness line, but rather about capacity. The Government recently announced, through the Network North deal, the electrification of the energy coast line. That will take 150 million tonnes of freight off that line every year and is hugely welcome. Through the SSN-AUKUS programme and the Dreadnought programme, and the doubling of the size of the shipyard in Barrow, a similar amount of freight will be needed going the other way. Will the Minister meet me and the wider Team Barrow board to discuss the merits of electrifying the Furness line?
Huw Merriman
As my hon. Friend knows, my officials are active members of Team Barrow, alongside the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and local partners, recognising the national significance of the submarine programme. Work is ongoing, looking at improvements to the A590, and at options for the rail industry to improve the local rail network. I would be delighted to meet my hon. Friend to discuss that work.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
Sarah Edwards (Tamworth) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
As of October 2023, a total of £573 million had been spent acquiring land and property assets on phase 2. That includes all property asset types, such as plots of land, farmland, farms, commercial property and domestic property. Any land and property asset that is no longer required will be sold, and a programme is being developed to do that.
Andrew Gwynne
Data from the High-Speed Rail Group suggests that the Government’s fire sale of land on the former Birmingham to Manchester stretch of HS2 will cost taxpayers a staggering £100 million. But they are not content with wasting taxpayers’ money and denying us the high-speed rail in the north that we deserve; Denton and Reddish is not even set to benefit from local rail improvements. That would not be hard—I have one train a week serving Denton and Reddish South stations. Why?
Huw Merriman
I am glad the hon. Gentleman mentioned that report, because it is completely wrong. For a start, it states that £205 million has been spent on land and property, which is wrong—it is a different figure.
Huw Merriman
I just stated exactly what it is, if the hon. Lady had listened to my answer. We have published exactly how much has been spent: on phase 2a it was £273 million, and on phase 2b it was £201 million. Property and land will be sold only when it is right to do so, ensuring good value for the taxpayer and the communities where the property is sold.
Sarah Edwards
It is my understanding that HS2 trains are designed for new tracks rather than the current Victorian-era infrastructure. Surely, that incompatibility will result in HS2 trains running slower and in fewer trains per hour for my constituents. Can the Minister explain how decreased capacity across the network, slower trains and reduced services will be better for my constituents?
Huw Merriman
Again, that is not the case at all. HS2 trains will be built to run across the network that they will travel on. I made the point previously that on the parts of the west coast main line where tilting trains go faster, HS2 trains will also be able to go at that faster speed. As a result, the journey time to Manchester will come down from two hours and 12 minutes to one hour and 40 minutes, leading to a faster service for all, Mr Speaker.
Jack Brereton (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Con)
As the Minister will know, I very much welcome the decision on phase 2 of HS2. However, there is still an impact on many land and property owners in Staffordshire. We heard in the Transport Committee that it could take up to two years to get land back to those owners. Will my hon. Friend look into this urgently to ensure that those property owners—particularly farmers, who need to know when they can sow their crops—get that land back as soon as possible?
Huw Merriman
In the words of Take That, I ask my hon. Friend for a little patience. It will take time to develop a programme to ensure that we deliver value for money for the taxpayer and do not disrupt local property markets. We will engage with the affected communities throughout the process. Where land can be rented back out and therefore put to use—farming is a good example —that is happening right now, and we will ensure that that happens even more so now that we have certainty about HS2.
Simon Lightwood (Wakefield) (Lab/Co-op)
Between July and September, Ministers admitted that tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money had been spent on HS2 land, at the same time that the Prime Minister was planning to cancel the project. Now, Ministers plan to flog that same land at a huge loss. Even the party that crashed the economy is still able to find unique ways to fleece the taxpayer. Will the Minister explain what safeguards he will put in place to protect the land and taxpayers’ money from this ill-judged and costly fire sale?
Huw Merriman
Despite what I said about this being the season of good will, quite frankly that is complete and utter nonsense. As I have stated, there will be a very careful analysis of the property that will be released. The Crichel Down rules require tests to be met, and only once they are will we return the property to the original owner at its market value. This will be done properly. We have delivered certainty: we have said that the route will not go ahead. What I am sure everyone along the line of the route would like to know is whether HS2 would go ahead under the Labour Transport team, or whether it would not, because of the Labour Treasury team. Give them some certainty.
Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)
John Penrose (Weston-super-Mare) (Con)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I thank my hon. Friend for joining me and others in the industry to discuss open-access rail on 27 October. I have today written to the Office of Rail and Road and the chief executive of Network Rail, asking them to review the unused access rights and agree a timeline, so that we can get decisions made more promptly. I hope to then give him more information.
Dame Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab)
Huw Merriman
As part of the engagement exercise, which the Prime Minister promised, I have met leaders from across the north. Last week, it was a pleasure to meet those from the region around Hull to discuss their preferred route. They made the point that the route should be prioritised because electrification has been talked about before, and I think that is a very good idea.
Peter Aldous (Waveney) (Con)
Lia Nici (Great Grimsby) (Con)
Huw Merriman
My hon. Friend follows my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh) and my hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes (Martin Vickers) in raising that matter at Transport questions. They are without doubt the strongest lobbyists when it comes to train timetabling changes. She will have seen the test train that ran in June. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said at the last Transport questions that we hope to make an announcement shortly. It is something that we are working on.
Elliot Colburn (Carshalton and Wallington) (Con)
Huw Merriman
I have met my hon. Friend and I appreciate the work that he does campaigning for the stations in his constituency. I have regular conversations with people from Govia Thameslink Railway, and I know that they have recently increased capacity on some busy services through Carshalton and Hackbridge. On Hackbridge station, I offer to meet him with a team from Network Rail to see whether we can address the matter that he mentions.
Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)
Such was the excitement in Wales in 2012 when Conservative Ministers announced that they would be building the four-mile western rail link to Heathrow to open in 2020 that First Minister Rhodri Morgan described it as one of the “most important announcements” in the last 50 years, but it was yet another broken promise. After more than a decade, when does the Transport Secretary expect the first spade to be dug into the ground to build the No.1 infrastructure priority of the Thames Valley region?
Huw Merriman
When this proposal was first mooted, it was to be a 50:50 split with Heathrow airport and the new runway, but matters changed after the pandemic. We are determined to see private sector involvement in the railways continue. If there is a private sector proposal, we are very happy to support it, but these schemes must not come at the expense of taxpayers.
Nickie Aiken (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con)
The Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Guy Opperman) saw for himself on Sunday night the scourge of pedicabs in the west end. With the Pedicabs (London) Bill having reached Report stage in the Lords, can he update the House on when we can expect it to be presented in this place?
Grahame Morris (Easington) (Lab)
One train per hour stops on the Durham coastline, usually with two carriages. This severely limits access to economic opportunities in Sunderland, Newcastle and Middlesbrough. Recently, Northern Rail confirmed a new two-hourly service, but my constituents will only be able to wave at it as it goes by, because the plan is that it will not stop at the stations at Seaham and Horden. Can the Rail Minister please use his influence with Northern to see whether he can get those trains to stop?
Huw Merriman
I am sure that everyone waves at the hon. Gentleman, great man that he is. It was great to meet him when he came to the Department. We talked about Durham coastal service and timetable changes. Today, Transport for the North is discussing timetable changes, so I hope that that proposal goes through and that I can therefore give Durham coastal service the improvement that he asks for.
Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) (Con)
May I encourage my right hon. Friend to cut the money given to the West of England Combined Authority, as it spends it extraordinarily badly on vanity schemes for the Mayor, on cutting bus services for my constituents and on pillorying motorists with this dreadful scheme, which is hated in Saltford, for a bus lane on the A4?
Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Reclaim)
Now that the blight of HS2 has been lifted from North West Leicestershire, can the Minister update the House on when work will commence on reopening the Ivanhoe line, which will offer rail access for the first time in many decades not only to my constituents, but to our neighbours in South Derbyshire?
Huw Merriman
The Prime Minister’s Network North announcement gave that commitment on the Ivanhoe line down to Leicester. We are fully committed to that. I know that I am due to be meeting the hon. Member on another matter, so I will give him more of an update then.
Paul Howell (Sedgefield) (Con)
Like many, I welcomed what was going on with Network North, particularly the announcement of Ferryhill Station. When it comes to the final assessment and decisions, we need to ensure that the right question is asked, as the Green Book says. The right question is: what is the socioeconomic benefit to the towns and villages around the station, not to the GDP of the UK? May I ask for that assurance please?
Huw Merriman
That was another commitment that the Prime Minister made in the Network North announcement. My hon. Friend has campaigned for Ferryhill Station for so long, and I thank him for bringing it forward. The business case will look at the socioeconomic conditions that he mentions, and I am confident that we will be able to get spades in the ground for his station very shortly.
Ian Mearns (Gateshead) (Lab)
LNER is going to consult again on altering the timetable to increase the frequency of trains from Edinburgh and Newcastle to London, but that inherently means a reduction in services to West Yorkshire, Manchester and Merseyside. That is very sad, and it is bad for the northern economy. This is not a timetabling issue; it is a capacity issue on the east coast main line. Can we have some investment in the east coast main line, north of York, to remedy those problems?
Huw Merriman
As things stand, we are unable to operate that service because the trans-Pennine route upgrade, which is delivering the billions of pounds’ worth of investment to enhance the route that the hon. Member asks for, is currently being constructed. That will provide the bandwidth. As I mentioned, today we hope to get a decision from Transport for the North that will improve services and add an extra service north to south. Then, with the multi-billion pound investment in the trans-Pennine route upgrade, we will get east-west service improvements as well.
Sara Britcliffe (Hyndburn) (Con)
In Hyndburn and Haslingden, we are hoping to have a very happy new year, as we hope to hear the announcement that both Rishton Station and Church and Oswaldtwistle Station have been successful in the Government’s Access for All scheme. Can any indication be given of when we might hear the announcement, and will the Government look favourably on them?
Huw Merriman
It is worth noting that 75% of all rail journeys now take place from step-free stations, with 220 stations made step-free under Access for All. We have 300 in the list for the next batch, and my hon. Friend will be pleased to know that hers are in that long list. We will decide shortly which ones to take forward next year.
Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op)
Will the ministerial team stop briefing against hydrogen combustion engines? The fact is that hydrogen is on its way, in trucks and JCBs. Cummins in my constituency is prepared for three years. [Interruption.] When will the Secretary of State stop?
Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)
I commend the work of my disabled young constituent, Nathaniel Yates from Reddish, who has assessed every single railway station in Greater Manchester. Too many of them are not step free. We have the money for Reddish North, but when can we get the money for Levenshulme?
Huw Merriman
I commend that work as well. In fact, the Great British Railways transition team has done a station accessibility study auditing every one of our 2,500 stations. That report is due out shortly. I hope that the team can work with the hon. Member’s constituency to come up with some good data and improve access for all.
Sir Robert Goodwill (Scarborough and Whitby) (Con)
The key element of Scarborough’s successful town bid is the station gateway project, but getting permission from Network Rail to knock a new entrance into the back of the station is proving slow and bureaucratic. Can the Secretary of State gently lean on Network Rail a bit, please?
Greg Smith (Buckingham) (Con)
Inevitably, concerns about overcrowding will come up this afternoon at a Chiltern Railways drop-in at Marylebone with Buckinghamshire MPs, so can the Rail Minister assure me that the Government are doing everything possible to push Chiltern to improve?
Huw Merriman
I can assure my hon. Friend that the Department is working closely with Chiltern as it looks to get more rolling stock to replace some of its ageing diesel stock. There are capacity issues, as he notes, because more people are using the railways, which is a great success, but we will work with the operator to ensure that it gets the rolling stock it needs.
Refurbishing Trains: Contracts
Huw Merriman Excerpts(5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Grahame Morris (Easington) (Lab)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on expediting the contract process for refurbishing existing UK trains.
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I thank the hon. Member for his question, which I will answer on behalf of the Secretary of State. The Department works closely with rolling stock owners and train operators to understand when new and refurbished trains are likely to be required, and to ensure a regular flow of work for train manufacturing companies. Trains are major assets, with a lifetime of 35 to 40 years, so there will naturally be peaks and troughs in procurement cycles. The average age of the current fleet is 17 years.
The Department has overseen the procurement of more than 8,000 new vehicles for the Great British mainline railway since 2012. Some of those are still being produced, including Alstom trains for South Western and West Midlands trains. Passenger travel habits have changed over the past three years, and while numbers are showing signs of improvement, we are still seeing reduced passenger revenue on the railway. We are aware that Alstom is facing difficult trading conditions. It is consulting its unions and employees on possible job losses. While it must be a commercial decision for Alstom, the Government have been working with the company to explore options to enable it to continue manufacturing at its Derby site. Officials from my Department and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport have held regular meetings with senior management at Alstom. We have also convened a cross-Whitehall group to advise on ways to support continued production at Derby and how best to support those workers who could lose their jobs.
The fact remains that the market for passenger trains is competitive. The Department cannot guarantee orders for individual manufacturers. None the less, we expect substantial continued demand for new trains. Last month, LNER confirmed an order of 10 new tri-mode trains for the east coast main line, and on Monday, a tender for new trains for the TransPennine Express route was launched. Contract awards are also expected between late 2024 and early 2025 for major orders for Southeastern, Northern and Chiltern. In the meantime, the Government will continue to work with Alstom and other UK manufacturers to ensure a strong and sustainable future for the rail industry.
Grahame Morris
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for granting this question on a matter of some urgency. I thank the Minister for his response, and I must impress upon him and the House that the Secretary of State must expedite the contract bidding process for updating existing UK trains to ensure the survival of the UK-based train manufacturing industry. Without immediate plans to allow companies to bid for new contracts, make no mistake, thousands of skilled jobs in the UK will go. The urgency stems from the crucial role of the Alstom factory in Derby. It is the UK’s only end-to-end, design, build and test train manufacturing facility, making it integral to the UK’s rail manufacturing industries.
Some 3,000 people currently work directly at Alstom, and 15,000 jobs in the supply chain rely on the factory’s continued production. Nick Crossfield, Alstom’s managing director, gave evidence to the Transport Committee yesterday, and he was absolutely clear that the Government need to decide now on how and where they want trains to be made in the future. If this Government do not expedite the bidding process, trains will not continue to be manufactured in the UK. They will start to be manufactured in North America, South America or south- east Asia.
Alstom’s current and final contract for rolling stock is on the Elizabeth line and is due to expire in six weeks. That could mean an end to the rail manufacturing industry in the UK as we know it. Yesterday, I met Unite the union, of which I am a proud member, and rail workers from Alstom site in Derby, and they asked for our help in retaining their jobs. Also just yesterday, two of the supply chain companies that supply Alstom went into liquidation due to the uncertainty over future orders from the Alstom factory. Timing on this issue has never been more crucial.
Huw Merriman
May I again thank my friend the hon. Member for Easington for raising this important issue? This is a matter of grave concern. The site has been operating in Derby for many years. Indeed, I think he and I both went to that site when it was formerly owned by Bombardier as part of a Transport Committee delegation. That support is assured. I also make the point that I am meeting Unite the union next week. It has been in touch, and I will be pleased to work with it and everyone to see what more can be done to keep that plant open.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing)
I call the Chair of the Select Committee.
Iain Stewart (Milton Keynes South) (Con)
I know that the Minister is a great advocate of the work of the Transport Committee, and I strongly urge him to look at the transcript of the evidence we received yesterday from not just Alstom but others in the rail industry. The fact is that the medium and long-term prospects for the sector are positive. What we are facing is a short-term lull. I impress on him the urgency of working with the rolling stock companies—ROSCOs—and others to try to bring forward some refurbishment contracts that Alstom and others can bid for to help smooth out these peaks and troughs in the sector.
Huw Merriman
I thank my hon. Friend, the Chair of the Select Committee, for the work he does—that evidence session was particularly pertinent for highlighting the matters he allows that Committee to raise. I can assure him that the Secretary of State wrote to rolling stock owners in September to encourage them to discuss with train operators and manufacturers opportunities to ease short-term challenges in the supply chain, such as refurbishments or major overhauls. We recognise the issue, and have asked others to do their best to deliver on that.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
I declare that I am a member of Unite the union, and met with trade union members yesterday. The urgency of this matter cannot be overstated—the clock is ticking, and those jobs will be consulted on in the very near future if contracts cannot be found. The Minister wrote in September, but what has he been doing over the past three months to bring forward contracts that will enable the plant to remain open?
Huw Merriman
As I have mentioned, we have written to ask rolling stock owners what more action they can take. Just on Monday, I was up in Yorkshire for the announcement of an extra £3.9 billion in funding for the TransPennine route upgrade. That also starts the tendering process for new rolling stock—29 new trains, with an option for another 26—and as I mentioned, we are looking for the tendering process for Southeastern, Chiltern and Northern to go forward as well, so orders are being put into the pipeline for train manufacturers.
Greg Smith (Buckingham) (Con)
From the generous time he has given me on this subject, my hon. Friend will know that overcrowding on the Chiltern line persists to a very serious degree, because the age of the rolling stock regularly leads to Chiltern having to run very short trains on the main line—trains that some people cannot even get on in the first place. As he looks at this important subject, will my hon. Friend do all he can to ensure that Chiltern can get trains refurbished and get new trains into the pipeline as soon as possible?
Huw Merriman
My hon. Friend is a champion for the Chiltern line, and he does indeed bend my ear on that subject—he is right to do so, because that line is getting busier now, which is a positive. That tendering process will be brought into being next year: we want to see Chiltern trains, and that process should allow them to be delivered.
Ian Mearns (Gateshead) (Lab)
We are not asking the Secretary of State to give one company special treatment over another—I should say that I am also a member of Unite the union—but I believe that the retention of British manufacturing capacity has to be regarded as strategically important for the United Kingdom. Will he allow us to go forward by granting all companies the opportunity to bid on new rail upgrade plans, such as Crossrail, Southeastern, and even the extensive Network North plans? Time is of the essence, and swift action from the Government can make a significant difference in securing the future of the UK rail manufacturing industry.
Huw Merriman
I can give the hon. Member that assurance. We will be bringing those contract tenders forward; we now have four train manufacturers, which is to be celebrated. We have CAF in south Wales, we have Hitachi up in the north-east, we have Alstom—of course—in Derby, and now we have Siemens in Goole. All those manufacturers are bidding, and the hon. Member is absolutely right that there must be a fair process for all, which will take place.
Simon Fell (Barrow and Furness) (Con)
It is not that long ago that we had the hated Pacer trains on the Furness line. We were very glad to see the back of those, but of course a new, shiny train is no good if it is not running. The Minister mentioned that if we are not seeing customer demand, that is going to hurt the industry, so could he speak to what the Government are doing to improve customer service and get the level of train service back up to where my constituents hope it will be?
Huw Merriman
We are aware that performance needs to be a lot better than it is currently, not just from train manufacturers but from Network Rail. Indeed, I was due to meet with the train operators this morning to discuss that issue; obviously, I have had to move that meeting, but I am very happy to meet with my hon. Friend so that I can take his particular points into account. We need to do more.
Simon Lightwood (Wakefield) (Lab/Co-op)
The Alstom Litchurch Lane factory in Derby has been building trains for over a century, since the dawn of train travel. It has provided high-skilled jobs for the local community for generations and helps support other local companies that form part of its supply chain, and as Britain’s biggest train-building plant, it plays a pivotal role in supporting the growth of the midlands and our country’s manufacturing sector.
Following the Government’s chaos and indecision over HS2 and the lack of a long-term strategy, hundreds of highly skilled jobs at the plant are at risk, with no confirmed workload beyond the first quarter of 2024, and contracts to build trains for HS2 pushed back until 2026, creating a gap in orders. This news will be deeply worrying for those affected and their families in the run-up to Christmas. It will also be extremely concerning for local businesses that rely on the factory and the wider rail sector, and for the people of Derby.
The workers at Alstom have only days to get a decision out of the Minister before their livelihoods are put at risk—time is up. They deserve to hear from the Minister how this has been allowed to happen, and what action the Government are taking to pursue a deal to secure the Derby plant and ensure that as many jobs are protected as possible. What urgent clarity can the Government provide Alstom on the short-term rolling stock pipeline, including possible refurbishments?
I am pleased that the Minister confirmed that he will be meeting representatives from Unite the union, and I hope that he will commit to working with them to safeguard jobs. When can the factory finally get certainty on HS2 orders, so that it can plan for the future and secure jobs? How many more rail manufacturing jobs across the country are at risk following the Government’s recent decision on HS2?
Earlier this year, Derby was named the Government’s home of Great British Railways. Just seven months on, the future of its landmark factory is in danger. At the heart of this is the chaos and indecision of the Conservative party. The Minister owes the people of Derby and the country an explanation of what he plans to do to stop the Prime Minister’s HS2 fiasco leading to more job losses.
Huw Merriman
I will, if I may, deal with the matter of HS2 head-on. The shadow rail Minister made that same point, saying that this was somehow linked to HS2, and it has now been made from the Dispatch Box today. The Secretary of State responded to the shadow rail Minister, so I shall put this on the record. With regard to HS2, he said:
“I can assure you this is not the case. Alstom is part of a contract with Hitachi to design, build and maintain HS2 trains for Phase One only. Phase One of HS2 between Birmingham and London will continue”.
That position has been reiterated by Alstom’s chief executive. I gently point out to the hon. Member for Wakefield (Simon Lightwood) that this has nothing to do with HS2; that has been established, and it is erroneous to claim otherwise.
The hon. Member also has to bear in mind that we now have four train manufacturers. We cannot just award a contract to one manufacturer; there has to be a fair tender process for all the jobs across all four plants. The Department for Transport has won a case brought by one of the other train manufacturers, demonstrating that our tendering process is fair.
Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con)
My hon. Friend referred in his opening statement to a new order from TransPennine. He will be aware that there is severe overcrowding on the Cleethorpes-Manchester-Liverpool service, because the trains have been reduced from six carriages to three in recent months. Can he enlighten me as to when the new stock will be coming forward, as it will greatly please my constituents?
Huw Merriman
I hope my hon. Friend’s constituents will be comforted by the order, because it is not just an order for new TransPennine express trains but a complete upgrade of the TransPennine route. The UK Government are spending more money on the TransPennine upgrade than was spent on the Elizabeth line, and that will mean delivering a better service. I was with the managing director of TransPennine trains on Monday up in Yorkshire and we were discussing just that. We need to improve the service and the rolling stock.
Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)
Upgrades to our trains must include electrification, but electrification is at a standstill, with only 101 miles of track being electrified this year. East West Rail will not be electrified as standard, and dirty diesel trains are still going through Bath. Will the Minister commit to a long-term plan for electrification?
Huw Merriman
The Prime Minister’s Network North plan did just that—electrification for Hull, between Sheffield and Manchester, and between Sheffield and Leeds. They are vast projects, not small projects. With regard to East West Rail, that is the upgrade of an existing line, which has its bridge sizes all the way through from Winslow to Bletchley, so it is difficult to put electrification on to that part. Let me remind the hon. Lady that there has been more than 1,200 miles of electrification in the past 12 years compared with just over 60 miles in the 12 years before that. I think that is a pretty good record.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South) (Lab)
I, too, have met workers from the Alstom plant in Derby and, as a Unite member myself, representatives of Unite as well. It was pleasing to hear that workers, representatives and management are united in their desire to retain good, high-skilled manufacturing jobs and train production there. I want to press the Minister again about recognising the importance of retaining the only end-to-end train production facilities in the UK during this short-term blip in production, so to speak. Does he agree that this investment in public transport is vital if we want to tackle the net zero challenges we face?
Huw Merriman
The hon. Lady is correct: that is vital. The challenge, and it is a good challenge, is that we now have four manufacturers, and we need to help them with international orders. That is why I sometimes go abroad with trade envoys from those companies to export around the globe. The average age of our rolling stock is down to just under 17 years—six years ago, it was 20 years—and as it gets fresher, there is a challenge with pipelines as well. However, we are bringing contracts forward so that we can fill the order book better.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
As a Derbyshire Member of Parliament, I can tell the Minister that there is huge concern about the future of Alstom. I think it is perfectly reasonable to say that the Government have lacked strategic direction on rail. They have gone from one project to another, and in the last few years there has been no sense of an industrial strategy. When we have had these debates in the past, Ministers were always blaming the EU and saying we could not support British manufacturing because of the EU. We are now out of the EU, and it seems to me that countries such as Germany are much better at supporting their manufacturing. Can we have a real sense of urgency from the Minister and an indication that the Government are going to make sure, strategically, that these jobs are saved?
Huw Merriman
I assure the hon. Member that the Secretary of State in particular has been meeting Alstom, and our officials and our director general meet Alstom, including with representatives. I will be doing so on Tuesday week. We will do everything we can to assist, but this is a commercial matter for the operator. As I have mentioned, I have been to that plant with the Transport Committee and seen what it does for the workforce and for the supply chain. We will be doing everything we can to assist Alstom in keeping that plant open.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for his answers. With many of my constituents dependent on Government help and support for manufacturing industry, I can well understand union fears at the dithering and the effect on the workforce. It is necessary to refurbish a number of trains, so can the Minister outline how the Government will ensure that the much-needed refurbishment contracts can be organised to keep people in work, rather than paying out redundancy money to them only to rehire them six months later when things are arranged properly? That is the desire of every Member of this House.
Huw Merriman
Yes, indeed. As I have mentioned, we are bringing forward orders, and the Secretary of State has written to the companies that finance train manufacturing and refurbishment to ask what more they can do to bring forward that refurbishment. At the risk of repeating myself, the challenge we have, and it is a good challenge, is that we have four fine train manufacturers and we have rolling stock that is younger than it previously was. So the aim is to try to get orders out, which we are doing, but I reiterate that it is also important that we help our train manufacturers export orders across the globe so that they can manufacture not just for home but for abroad, and keep those jobs going.
Draft Strikes (Minimum Service Levels: Passenger Railway Services) Regulations 2023
Huw Merriman Excerpts(5 months, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Strikes (Minimum Service Levels: Passenger Railway Services) Regulations 2023.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Edward. The regulations will be made under powers conferred by the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, as amended by the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023. The purpose of the regulations is to set minimum service levels that can apply to specified services during passenger rail strikes. These minimum service levels are designed to balance the public’s need to make important journeys and the impact of rail strikes on the economy on the one hand, with the ability of rail workers to take strike action on the other. It is my hope that strike action can be avoided, but the regulations will mean that when strikes take place, the rail industry can provide an improved and more consistent service, in a way that is proportionate and fair for all parties.
Let me give some background to the regulations. Strike action in the rail sector has occurred frequently in recent years, and has a significant impact on people’s ability to travel. Since 2019, there has not been a single day when there has not been either a strike on our railways, or mandates for strikes outstanding. The result has been many periods of disruptive strike action, in some cases resulting in the suspension of all rail services on affected routes. Between June 2022 and November 2023, there have been 42 days of widespread disruption caused by strikes. That can have considerable consequences for the passengers and communities affected. People often struggle, or are unable, to travel to work. Others have difficulty accessing vital services, such as education and healthcare. Businesses and the wider economy suffer. Enabling a minimum service to operate during rail strikes is a means of protecting against disproportionate impacts of strike action.
The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act, passed on 20 July this year, establishes a clear framework for implementing minimum service levels. The Act amends the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 to give the relevant Secretary of State the power to make regulations setting minimum service levels for specified services in six key sectors, including transport. In addition, the strikes Act sets out the framework through which minimum service levels can be deployed. It gives employers the ability to issue a work notice to a trade union if a strike is called on a service specified in the regulations. The work notice must set out the staff whose are reasonably necessary if the minimum service level set out in the regulations is to be met, and the work that those staff must undertake. The trade union must take reasonable steps to ensure that the trade union members identified in a work notice comply with its requirements.
The regulations for passenger rail specify three categories of service that minimum service levels apply to, and the associated minimum service levels. Category A is train operation services. Category B is infrastructures services, and category C is light rail services.
John Spellar (Warley) (Lab)
The Minister says that the trade union should ensure that its members comply with the work notice. What mechanism should it use to ensure that?
Huw Merriman
I will come back later in the debate to the right hon. Gentleman’s point about the action that we would require trade unions to take—or rather, not take—to ensure that the standard is met.
Let me explain categories A to C. Category A covers train operation services provided by passenger train operators under agreements with the UK Government, including services provided as operator of last resort, and by devolved Governments, and local transport authorities and executives. It therefore excludes services provided by open-access and freight operators; heritage and tourist services; and international train services that start or finish outside Great Britain. The minimum service level for train operation services is the provision of those services necessary to deliver the equivalent of 40% of the operator’s timetabled services, as shown in the most recently published National Rail timetable, during the strike.
Vicky Ford (Chelmsford) (Con)
My constituency of Chelmsford has a particularly busy train station. Indeed, I am told it is the busiest two-platform train station anywhere in the country outside London. It is used by many people to commute to work, and by many young people to get in and out of schools and colleges. I am absolutely delighted to support the regulations, because train strikes have made those people’s life an absolute nightmare. Does that 40% figure mean 40% across the whole day, or will the 40% rate apply in the rush hours, so that my young people can still get to school or college?
Huw Merriman
I thank my right hon. Friend for her point. The 40% of train operation services is 40% of services across the train operator’s timetable as a whole. It applies for as long as that timetable runs. I will go on to talk about category B, because that is hours-specific guidance.
Category B covers services listed in the regulations that are provided by infrastructure managers. During strikes by railway infrastructure workers, the minimum service level is the provision of services between the hours of 06:00 and 22:00 on the priority routes that are listed in the regulations, and on certain enabling infrastructure within a 5-mile radius of the priority routes, including connections to depots, sidings, and rail freight terminals.
Category C covers train operation and infrastructure services provided on the 11 light rail systems specified in the regulations. The minimum service level is the provision of services necessary to deliver, during the strike, the equivalent of 40% of timetabled services as shown in the most recently published timetable issued by the operator of the light rail service.
We have designed the minimum service levels to address appropriately the type of strike action that we typically see, and to ensure that the levels are operationally viable for employers. The minimum service levels are intended to achieve a suitable and proportionate balance between delivering benefits to passengers and the wider economy, and workers’ ability to strike. Our work has been informed by extensive consultation and engagement, including a public consultation between 20 February and 15 May of this year, and consultation with train and infrastructure operators, passenger representative groups, unions, and a wide range of other stakeholders.
Once in force, the regulations will apply to any future strikes, even if the mandates for those strikes predate the primary legislation, which received Royal Assent on 20 July this year. That will allow employers in the rail industry to use these regulations as soon as they come into force, should they choose to do so. The Government have identified passenger rail as a priority for minimum service levels. These regulations deliver on that commitment, and deliver on the 2019 manifesto.
Huw Merriman
I am not giving way. I said I would come back before the end of the debate on the points the right hon. Gentleman made.
The regulations mean that train operators will be able to provide the equivalent of 40% of their timetable during strikes, whereas on some recent strike days, a number of companies have been unable to run any effective service at all. During full-day infrastructure strikes, priority routes can be open for 16 hours, instead of the 11 hours provided for under the industry’s current contingency arrangements, with some additions to the routes normally provided. Importantly, this will enable industry to encompass both the morning and evening peaks, so passengers will have more certainty around getting to work and returning home in the evening. These regulations are a positive step towards addressing the impact of rail strikes in a proportionate way. I commend them to the Committee.
Huw Merriman
I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for their points. I should start with the right hon. Member for Warley, given that I said I would come back to him. His question was along the lines of what steps will be required. It is a generic test—it is a legal definition that one would look at. I can read it to him. It is not off a blue Post-it note; it is actually in the guidance. To paraphrase, when a work notice has been issued by a relevant employer, a trade union is under an obligation to take reasonable steps to ensure that its members named in the work notice comply with its requirements. In that regard, there is not that much of a role to play. I should make it absolutely clear—I think there were errors in some hon. Members’ starting points—that a work notice makes no differentiation between whether an employee is a member of a trade union or not, or whether they want to work or not. It is a generic test in that sense.
On the point made by the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West, certain individuals may therefore find themselves on a work notice more than others, so some regard will be given to ensure that if a work notice has been given to an employee in one particular industrial action, they are not taken up the next time to ensure they have their right to strike. To go back to the right hon. Member for Warley, it is more that the trade union should not take any steps to stop that individual coming to work under a work notice, rather than it being required to do anything, but it is a test. I worked as an in-house lawyer for 18 years, and I often looked at what reasonable steps meant and how I would interpret that. There is enough precedent in court to do that.
John McDonnell
It is absolutely critical to get this clear. If a trade union leader engages in a debate during a dispute and argues that the offer from the employer is not satisfactory, and therefore that there should be a strike and people should take industrial action, does that influence the requirements of taking reasonable steps, or does it go beyond reasonable steps?
Huw Merriman
What the right hon. Gentleman is describing is the calling of industrial action in the first place. The idea behind these regulations, of course, is that, when industrial action has been called and an employer chooses at their discretion to issue a work notice—I will come back to that, because it is key that it is not the Government but the employer who decides—that is where the determination comes in. It is whether the trade union, after the work notice has been issued, is taking reasonable steps, so I would differentiate in that regard.
John McDonnell
So if that debate takes place while the strike is on, and the trade union general secretary urges their members to continue with the strike, does that influence it? Is that part of undermining and encouragement?
Huw Merriman
Well, I am going into a lot of detail here, and that would ultimately be for a court to determine. I suppose the right hon. Gentleman is asking what happens if a person is known to be on a work notice and somebody reads out, “X must ensure they are taking industrial action.” The courts might argue that that is not a reasonable step, but hopefully our examples have given enough clarity.
Again, I want to be absolutely clear on this point. I have a great deal of respect for the hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North, and I was interested in the point he made about Scotland. It is absolutely clear that it is down to each individual employer to determine whether they wish to issue work notices or whether they are able to gain enough traction from the workforce without the issuance of work notices. That is not a matter for Government; it is down to the employer. I was intrigued that the hon. Gentleman made it pretty clear that he would not give the same freedom to employers when it comes to ScotRail, because he seemed to intimate that it would not be taking part. He seems to be taking more of a forthright view of what the employer should do than the Government.
Gavin Newlands
ScotRail is owned and operated by the Scottish Government, who have been very clear in their attitude to this legislation: they will not issue work notices. While I am on my feet, I want to quickly ask about Network Rail, which is obviously a reserved issue that comes under the auspices of the Department for Transport, but it operates slightly independently in Scotland. Some of its workforce will potentially fall under a work notice for DFT, but obviously a lot of network in Scotland is used only by ScotRail. How will that work?
Huw Merriman
There are interesting parallels. When I talk about train operators, I also mean the operators of last resort: Southeastern, the east coast main line and TransPennine Express. They are under the same control that he referenced the Executive in Scotland having. We, as the Government, will treat those with the exact same autonomy, and will not be autocratic; we will not tell them what they must and must not do. There is talk of this legislation being controlling, but we are demonstrating that we are not being controlling, whereas the hon. Gentleman is demonstrating that he would perhaps intervene, which is obviously a policy matter for him.
Network Rail is, of course, an arm’s length body. It will be down to Network Rail across the whole of Great Britain to determine whether it wishes to use the work notices, when it comes to category B. That will be a matter for Network Rail in Scotland, as it will be in England, and not for me, the hon. Member or the Scottish Executive.
I want to come back to a point that the hon. Member for Portsmouth South and others mentioned: safety. Let me be absolutely crystal clear—this is why we have the safest railway in Europe—that there will be no compromise when it comes to safety and these regulations. Those are not just words. Everyone needs to remember that we already have a minimum service; it is the key route strategy, and it operates right now, but our contention is that it does not operate to the same extent—it is about 20%. Safety is the most important ingredient during a strike day, as it is during a non-strike day. There will be no difference to that, as far as the regulations are concerned; safety will always be paramount in the railways.
Jess Phillips (Birmingham, Yardley) (Lab)
I wonder whether the reason that we have one of the safest railways in the world is the same reason that my family and I do not have fingers missing from industrial accidents. Maybe the people we should thank for that are the trade unions.
Huw Merriman
Of course I pay tribute to everybody on the railway who takes safety so seriously, but it is fair to say that we had trade unions when we did not have such a safe railway, and we have them now that there is a safe railway. That seems to suggest that it is the entire railway family that makes railways safe. We have the independent Rail Safety and Standards Board, and we will ensure that safety is paramount on the railways.
I will touch on freight. Freight is not included in the regulations. That was part of the consultation; the freight industry did not wish to be included, but, of course, freight benefits from the regulations. If there is an infrastructure strike and more of the key route network can be opened up, that means that more freight can be delivered, as well, which is important.
I come back to a point made by the hon. Member for Portsmouth South that was slightly contradicted by other hon. Members. That was that the Secretary of State should get to the table and deal with the trade unions. Of course, we have had some deals with the trade unions. According to the right hon. Member for Warley, the Government want the industrial action to continue, and the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington said that the Government ultimately control all train operations. If we are both controlling and making deals, that must mean that the Government have got round the table and had those discussions; I certainly know about the discussions that I have had. Or perhaps the right hon. Gentlemen pluck out arguments that suit them. When it comes down to it, we want industrial action to be settled. We welcome Transport Salaried Staffs’ Association and Unite the Union settling their industrial action, and it looks as though—we will find out on Thursday—the RMT has settled its action as well.
We do not want to use these regulations, because we would rather there were no strikes at all. The Opposition claim to be the party of the workers when it comes to the rail workers, but not the workers who use the trains. A train driver is paid £60,000 for a 35-hour, four-day working week—we have an offer on the table to increase that to £65,000—but people on those trains who earn a lot less are inconvenienced, and cannot get where they are going, because there is no proper minimum service. I have a constituent who writes to me to say, “I’m on a zero-hours contract; when train drivers go on strike, I don’t get the opportunity”—
Huw Merriman
The key is to ensure that those individuals have the right to go to work. It may be asked, “Why don’t you ban zero-hours contracts?”. I am pleased to hear that that is now Labour policy. We want to ensure that those who want to go to work, and who are not as well paid as train drivers, have the choice to do so. That is the balance, and the measures are proportionate.
Mark Eastwood (Dewsbury) (Con)
I should declare that, surprisingly, I am a member of a trade union—a moderate one, I have to say. I have heard a lot of noise from the Opposition about safety and workers’ rights, but not much about the passengers. Does the Minister agree that the only thing Labour cares about is the flow of money from their union paymasters?
Huw Merriman
My hon. Friend has said it, and obviously he has the experience to do so. It is a fair point that needs to be considered. Through the regulations, we are taking a proportionate approach that still allows those who wish to strike the right to do so. Equally, it allows those who wish to go about their lawful business—to go to work, go to school, get skills or go to their health appointment—the right to do so. Those people deserve that right. We should be on the side of people who really need train services.
Huw Merriman
I will not give way. I have been very generous with my time.
It has been suggested that the regulations will just cause rail workers to go off sick. Obviously, that is a contractual employment matter; no one is allowed just to go off sick under the terms of their contract. It will be down to employers to determine whether to use the work notices. They will then determine how the work notices operated, see how they worked, and decide whether individuals’ behaviour needs to be looked at, but I would not expect anyone in the rail industry, good people as they are, to go off sick unless they were sick. I am sure that everybody on the Committee would agree on that.
I will address the points made by the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West. With regard to article 11, there has to be a proportionate approach. That will be a legal test, and we believe that the test is met. I believe that she also referred to the RPC impact assessment not being published. As requested, we provided further work to that body on 7 November. The RPC is now considering the input we made, and we wait to hear from it. A view was taken that information on matters relating to the umbrella Act would not need to be provided under the regulations, because that was for the umbrella Act. The RPC wanted more information, and we were happy to provide it. The impacts on small and medium-sized businesses, which will differ across the rail network, was another matter to be addressed. We take impact assessments seriously in the Department; we have a very good record of delivering them, and will continue to work to ensure that they are delivered.
The regulations make possible a considerable improvement in the service that can be delivered during rail strikes. They will support passengers who are making important journeys, including to work and to access vital services, and will limit strikes’ impacts on the economy. However, that is carefully and proportionately balanced with workers’ ability to take strike action. Although I am sure we all hope that strike action can be avoided, when they do take place, the regulations will provide a means of addressing the disproportionate impacts that strikes can have on the public, communities and businesses. I hope that the Committee will join me in supporting the regulations.
Transport
Huw Merriman Excerpts(5 months, 2 weeks ago)
Ministerial CorrectionsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab)
The Government’s mishandling of HS2 was and is absolutely staggering, but their attempt to pull the wool over northern eyes with Network North is a farce. Does the Minister really believe the people of the north-east are falling for his fag-end fake network to nowhere?
Huw Merriman
I just do not accept that at all. I gave a run through of a list of the £36 billion that is being put back into local projects, including £1.8 billion extra for the north-east. That could, for example, be an option for the Leamside line to be reopened. I would have thought that, rather than stating that none of this is going to happen, the hon. Member would be holding us to account to make sure it does, and that she might actually support investment. There will be as much investment—indeed, more—in all areas.
[Official Report, 26 October 2023, Vol. 738, c. 965.]
Letter of correction from the Minister of State, Department for Transport, the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Huw Merriman):
An error has been identified in my response to the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Chi Onwurah) during Transport questions. The response should have been:
Huw Merriman
I just do not accept that at all. I gave a run through of a list of the £36 billion that is being put back into local projects, including an increase in funding for the north-east to £1.8 billion. That could, for example, be an option for the Leamside line to be reopened. I would have thought that, rather than stating that none of this is going to happen, the hon. Member would be holding us to account to make sure it does, and that she might actually support investment. There will be as much investment—indeed, more—in all areas.
HS2 Six-monthly Report to Parliament: November 2023
Huw Merriman Excerpts(5 months, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
Review of High Speed 2 (HS2) including programme update, benefits, local community impact and engagement, land and property, programme governance and a forward look. Phase Overall spend to date (£ billion) 2023 to 2024 budget (£ billion) 2023 to 2024 forecast (£ billion) Variance (£ billion) 1 3 24.6 5.8 6 -0.2 2a 1 0.2 0.1 0.1 2b Western Leg 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.1 HS2 East (West to East Midlands) and East Midlands to Leeds HS2 Eastern Leg (West Midlands to Leeds) 0.7 0 0 0 Total 27 6.2 6.3 0.0 1 The figures set out relate to the historic scope of the programme and have not been amended to reflect the Network North announcement. 2 The numbers set out in the tables have been rounded to aid legibility. Due to this, they do not always tally. All figures stated below are given in 2019 prices 3 Spend to date includes a £0.9 billion liability (provision) representing the Department’s obligation to purchase land and property. Oct 2020 report (£ billion) Mar 2021 report (£ billion) Oct 2021 report (£ billion) Mar 2022 report (£ billion) Oct 2022 report (£ billion) June 2023 report (rounded to billions) September 2023 report (rounded to billions) Total HS2 Ltd contingency drawdown and % used 0.3 (5%) 0.4 (7%) 0.8 (14%) 1.3 (23%) 1.5 (28%) 1.8 (33%) 2.6 (46%) Total HS2 Ltd contingency remaining 5.3 (95%) 5.2 (93%) 4.8 (86%) 4.3 (77%) 4.0 (72%) 3.7 (67%) 3.0 (54%) Oct 2020 Report (£ billion) Mar 2021 Report (£ billion) Oct 2021 Report (£ billion) Mar 2022 Report (£ billion) Oct 2022 Report (£ billion) June 2023 Report (£ billion) September 2023 Report (rounded to billions) Total Government-retained contingency drawdown and % used 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)4 0 (0%) Total Government-retained contingency remaining 4.3 (100%) 4.3 (100%) 4.3 (100%) 4.3 (100%) 4.3 (100%) 4.3 (100%) 4.3 (100%) 4 As highlighted in the October 2021 report, £0.015 billion has been allocated to enable Old Oak Common to increase the number of trains it serves before opening services to Euston station from 3 to 6 trains per hour but has not yet been drawn down from Government-retained contingency.
Overview
The Government announced a new plan, via the Network North Command Paper, to improve transport across Great Britain on 4 October. This directs spending away from future phases of HS2 towards local and regional transport schemes, while committing to the improved delivery of HS2 phase 1.
This is because the facts around HS2 have changed since its inception: costs have increased, delivery has been delayed and the pandemic has changed the travel patterns HS2 was originally designed to serve. Cumulatively, these factors have weakened the economic case. The Government have, therefore, made the difficult decision to not extend HS2 beyond Birmingham, while taking a radical new approach to Euston station.
Instead, the Government have announced a new plan for transport spending, as outlined in the Network North Command Paper. Through this, the Government intend to reallocate £36 billion (2023 prices) of funding earmarked for the HS2 programme to a range of other high priority transport schemes across the north, the midlands and Great Britain, investing in hundreds of projects in towns, cities and rural areas.
We will complete phase 1 of HS2 between London and the west midlands. There will be two branches: one to central Birmingham; and one to Handsacre, near Lichfield, meaning passengers will be able to travel on HS2 trains through to Manchester, Liverpool and Scotland, joining the west coast main line for the rest of their journeys. No decisions have been made on the train service that will run when HS2 is operational.
As is set out by the Network North Command Paper:
The Government’s view is that the best interests of our country are not served by progressing with further phases of the project, in the face of diminishing relative benefits and more pressing transport priorities elsewhere. So we will not proceed with phase 2a, 2b or HS2 East.
HS2 phase 2b western leg is now cancelled but some sections of the route are the same as those anticipated to be part of Northern Powerhouse Rail. As set out in the Network North Command Paper, the Government will take the time to consider next steps for the phase 2b legislation that has been reintroduced into Parliament and whether there is a way to repurpose that to deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail. A further £12 billion (2023 prices), additional to the £36 billion, has been earmarked to better connect Manchester and Liverpool. This would allow the delivery of Northern Powerhouse Rail as previously planned, including high-speed lines. But we are working with local leaders to agree whether they wish to suggest other uses of this money to achieve the objective with that £12 billion.
We are going to scale back the project at Euston and adopt a new development-led approach to the Euston quarter which will deliver a station that works, is affordable and can be open and running trains as soon as possible. We will not provide design features we do not need and will instead deliver a six-platform station which can accommodate the trains we will run to Birmingham and onwards and which best supports regeneration of the local area. In this way we will attract private funding and unlock the wider land development opportunities the new station offers, while radically reducing its costs to the taxpayer.
The scope of phase 1 will now be reviewed to guarantee delivery of only that required for updating the reduced HS2 programme.
Delivery remains on track for the initial high-speed services between Old Oak Common in west London and Birmingham Curzon Street by 2029-2033.
Work on HS2 in Lichfield and the surrounding villages, including the connection to the west coast main line at Handsacre junction, will continue.
In the Department’s (DfT) accounting officer assessment of 4 October, the accounting officer concluded that continuing to build phase 1 resulted in an estimated benefit-cost ratio (BCR) above 1 in a range of scenarios taking into account sunk costs to date and the estimated remediation costs of not continuing, and based on an indicative timetable of eight trains per hour between Euston, Birmingham Curzon Street and the north-west. Work has begun on an updated business case for the revised programme. This will update the strategic case for HS2 in light of Network North and provide a full economic assessment following decisions being made on the HS2 train services running to and from Euston. These will be made in due course, taking advice from West Coast Partnership Development, HS2 Ltd and Network Rail, and will be subject to consultation. An updated phase 1 business case will be published in due course.
This report uses data provided by HS2 Ltd and covers the period between March 2023 and September 2023 inclusive. Unless stated, all figures are presented in 2019 prices. Data on benefits is taken from September 2023.
Programme update
Schedule
The forecast date for initial HS2 services between Birmingham Curzon Street and Old Oak Common remains within the range of 2029 to 2033.
An updated delivery-into-service range for services to Euston will be provided in due course.
Affordability
In my last report, I highlighted the cost pressures faced by HS2 and the work HS2 Ltd was undertaking to review the phase 1 estimate at completion (EAC). The HS2 Ltd board has now advised me that its updated EAC for phase 1 is £49 billion to £57 billion (2019 prices), the scope of which was the route from Euston to Birmingham and works north to Fradley and the Handsacre junction. This is a very significant upwards revision compared with HS2 Ltd’s previous projections and is a wide range in comparison to the scope of the remaining work.
HS2 Ltd has advised that cost increases on phase 1 since baseline 7.11 stem from a wide range of compounding issues including design performance, delivery productivity, consenting delays, and a difficult operating environment with covid and the Ukraine war affecting the supply chain. In particular, the cost of main work civils (MWCC) work has increased since notice to proceed, due to an interplay of these factors. The latest projection HS2 Ltd provided for MWCC is £21.8 billion to £23.4 billion (in 2019 prices), which represents a cost increase of £6.1 billion from baseline 7.1.
1 Aggregated costs as set out in the full business case which was approved at notice to proceed in 2020.
The Government disagree with the £49 billion to £57 billion figure for two reasons. First, it was drawn up by HS2 Ltd before it was notified of the decision to cancel phase 2. It reflects HS2 Ltd’s understanding of the project in September—that it would be proceeding to Manchester and the east midlands, and with more expansive plans for Euston. The scope and costs of phase 1 will now be reassessed following the decision not to proceed beyond the midlands, including the decision to adopt a development-led approach to Euston.
Secondly, DfT makes different assumptions on how much cost risk remains addressable, including different assessments of: how future risks could be actively mitigated; how revised incentives could change the trajectory on the costs of completing the civils and systems work; and the size and composition of HS2 Ltd’s own operating costs. As set out in the Network North Command Paper, for the historic phase 1 scope, DfT officials have, therefore, estimated a provisional range of £45 billion to £54 billion on the basis of the same data used by HS2 Ltd, but using different assumptions on how much remaining cost risk remains addressable.
I have asked the HS2 Ltd executive chair, Sir Jon Thompson, to update HS2 Ltd’s estimate to consider the revised scope of phase 1 and the cancellation of the wider scheme, reflecting reduced scope and the costs of any changes; to explain and evidence why the upwards revisions have been so significant and their causes; and to agree an EAC with Government by providing an action plan on how HS2 Ltd will deliver the revised scope at the lowest reasonable cost, detailing actions needed to support HS2 Ltd and its supply chain from the Government.
I will update Parliament once that revised estimate has been provided and new cost targets have been provided to HS2 Ltd, including clarity on any changes to the scope or the funding envelope. I propose to state this in both 2019 values (for comparison to the historic position) and in 2023 values (to show the cost in current terms and to reflect the recent period of high inflation).
As stated in the Network North Command Paper, the Government have increased their ambitions for the Euston redevelopment and have begun work to create a transformed “Euston Quarter” led by a new development corporation, or equivalent, and using private funding to deliver a station that works. Euston sits in an internationally significant commercial district close to a world-leading cluster of scientific, research and development institutions, providing a significant opportunity to leverage private sector investment and minimise up-front cost to the taxpayer. Government Ministers have undertaken substantial engagement with Euston stakeholders since the announcement, including through a meeting with the Euston Partnership board chaired by Peter, Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill, which brings together HS2 Ltd, Network Rail, Lendlease, Transport for London (TfL), the Greater London Authority (GLA), Camden Borough Council (CBC) and the West Coast Partnership. Going forward, the Department will consider a range of delivery models, financing mechanisms and the optimal scope, risk allocation and phasing of the comprehensive scheme. I will provide further updates to Parliament as this work progresses.
Delivery
Phase 1 is already well under way, with the project three years into its construction phase. There are currently 350 active construction sites between the west midlands and London.
Tunnel drives are making good progress across the route. In the Chilterns, the tunnel boring machines (TBMs) Florence and Cecilia have successfully reached the Little Missenden ventilation shaft; more than three quarters of their 10-mile drive beneath the Chilterns is now complete. Sushila and Caroline, the two TBMs creating the first section of tunnel that will make up the 8.4 mile Northolt tunnels between West Ruislip and Old Oak Common station, have completed the first mile of twin-bored tunnel in the capital. Since their launch in November 2022, the 2,000-tonne TBMs have each installed over 847 tunnel rings, made up of 5,929 concrete segments in total.
Overall, half the tunnel boring machines for the route have launched, one in six tunnel journeys—comprising more than 14 miles of new tunnels—have been completed, and 16,897 rings have been installed.
Stage 1 of the design and build contract for Birmingham Curzon Street was awarded to Mace Dragados Joint Venture in May 2021. An update on stage 2 is expected in the coming weeks.
At Old Oak Common, the excavation of the underground box that will house the HS2 station platforms is now over 50% complete. In line with the programme, groundworks for the conventional rail station which will accommodate eight platforms on the realigned Great Western main line and relief lines, commenced in October 2022.
A contract between HS2 Ltd and Network Rail has been confirmed for the delivery of the rail systems element of the GWML platforms. Both the Secretary of State and I visited Old Oak Common in August. I hosted the Deputy Mayor, TfL commissioner and rail industry representatives to discuss progress across the site. The progress made at Old Oak Common is crucial for realising the potential for the creation of jobs and provision of housing enabled by the station through the new transport connections provided, which the Government are working hard to achieve, together with the Mayor of London. To that end, I have created a taskforce including Transport for London and the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC) to consider and take forward action on this critical part of the programme. The first meeting of the Old Oak Taskforce took place on 31 October 2023.
The Department and HS2 Ltd have started working to bring the work on phase 2a to a stop in a safe and efficient way while ensuring value for money. There are a wide range of tasks, including wrapping up contracts and not progressing the design and delivery partner and main works civil framework contracts. Land will be remediated where early/enabling works had commenced, and where new habitats have been completed, a suitable long term management plan will be established to support our “no net loss of biodiversity” commitment.
On the HS2 Crewe-Manchester scheme, the Hybrid Bill Select Committee continued its work hearing petitions from people and communities affected by the Bill up until Parliament went into recess in September. The Committee produced its first report on 19 July setting out its views and responses to the issues raised by petitioners to that point, to which the Government responded in September. A second additional provision was also deposited in July 2023.
The Select Committee adjourned in October, pending further instruction from the House following the cancellation of the HS2 phase 2b western leg. The Bill has been carried over into the next parliamentary Session and we are currently considering its future as we look to deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail, or any alternative that local leaders may agree, as quickly as possible, as outlined in the Network North Command Paper.
The Network North Command Paper set out the Government’s policy to pivot away from high-speed rail interventions and focus spending on the transport infrastructure benefiting the local journeys that matter most to communities. While Network North cancelled the HS2 schemes north and east of Birmingham, it maintained and added to the other commitments in the integrated rail plan, including broadening the scope of Northern Powerhouse Rail. The existing Northern Powerhouse Rail commitments in the integrated rail plan continue to stand. The King’s Speech set out the Government’s intention to repurpose the HS2 phase 2b Bill to provide options to progress the delivery of Northern Powerhouse Rail. Work continues to deliver the other integrated rail plan schemes, and to develop the new schemes brought forward by the Network North Command Paper.
The Department is working with HS2 Ltd to stop development work on the phase 2b western leg that is no longer required in a safe and efficient way, while ensuring value for money. The Department is also considering repurposing the development work that is required to deliver Northern Powerhouse Rail as outlined in the Network North Command Paper. The Network North Command Paper committed £12 billion to better connect Manchester to Liverpool. This would allow the delivery of Northern Powerhouse Rail as previously planned, including high-speed lines. As promised in Network North, we will work with local leaders to agree whether they wish to suggest other uses of this money to achieve the objectives within that cost envelope.
Following the cancellation of phase 2, a study will be established to consider connectivity in the midlands and connecting areas.
HS2 Ltd continues tendering for phase 1 rail systems packages, including track installation, overhead catenary and high-voltage power. HS2 Ltd has provided suppliers with scope clarifications to support them in submitting competitive bids. Bids previously submitted by the supply chain showed higher indirect costs and fees than estimated and are currently unaffordable. These pressures are recognised in the revised EAC range advised by HS2 Ltd. HS2 Ltd continues to develop its management capability for the rail systems alliance, which is responsible for delivering these systems packages in a collaborative model.
Benefits
Growth and opportunities for local communities
HS2 between London and Birmingham will continue to act as a catalyst for local investment and regeneration, unlocking growth around new and existing station sites and in the wider area. Local places are best placed to develop strategies and delivery plans aimed at making the most of the arrival of HS2.
DfT and HS2 Ltd are working closely with partners across both central and local government to ensure places along the HS2 route take full advantage of the opportunities for economic growth, investment, regeneration and placemaking.
At Euston, we will appoint a development company, separate from HS2 Ltd, to manage the delivery of this project. We will also take on the lessons of success stories such as Battersea Power Station and Nine Elms, which secured £9 billion of private sector investment and thousands of homes. We will harness the future growth that the station will unleash to support its development, to ensure we get the best possible value for the British taxpayer—and ensure that funding is underpinned by contributions from those people and businesses its development supports. At the same time, we are considerably upping the ambition of the Euston redevelopment, where we will be looking to establish a development corporation to create a transformed “Euston Quarter”.
Green transport for a net-zero future
HS2 Ltd continues to make progress on its ambition of reducing the carbon emissions associated with building the railway. The company exceeded its carbon reduction target for 2022-23, achieving a cumulative forecast reduction of 29.6% against the phase 1 baseline. This exceeds the forecast 28% reduction previously expected by March 2023.
The programme remains committed to supporting projects that create and restore woodland along the HS2 route. The HS2 woodland fund was relaunched in June, with £3.25 million available to support landowners near the route to create new native broadleaved woodlands and restore existing ancient woodland sites.
HS2 Ltd is continuing to work on several active travel outcomes. This includes continuing the design and delivery of active travel interfaces across phase 1, exploring opportunities for linear active travel corridors along phase 1 through the repurposing of maintenance access tracks or use of construction roads for walking, wheeling and cycling. HS2 Ltd also continues to work with Sustrans to enhance sections of the national cycle network.
HS2’s stations are being designed to be sustainable. At Old Oak Common, innovative and lower carbon approaches in designing and constructing the station have been used. The station needs minimal energy and net zero emissions while in operation, and there are extensive public transport and active travel choices included in the design.
Skilled workers for an innovative industry
The HS2 programme continues to support tens of thousands of jobs and thousands of UK businesses have already worked on the project. There are over 3,000 UK businesses in the supply chain across the United Kingdom. It is helping train a skilled workforce for the UK’s wider rail and construction industries. The programme has created over 1,300 apprenticeships since phase 1 Royal Assent in 2017 and currently supports over 30,000 jobs, the majority of which are currently working on delivering phase 1.
As the largest infrastructure project in the country, HS2 will also continue to be at the forefront of innovation within the construction industry, using its buying power to ensure innovation is embraced and driven throughout the supply chain, and using the HS2 accelerator programme to support SMEs and pilot new ways of scaling digital technology and innovative delivery.
Local community impact and engagement
HS2 Ltd and its contractors are committed to minimising the impacts of construction on communities. I receive regular updates from the independent construction commissioner and the HS2 residents’ commissioner who proactively assure the considerate delivery of HS2 works along with the Department for Transport’s independent construction inspectors.
In his 25th report, the construction commissioner highlighted the area around Euston station as a particular challenge for communities since the decision to pause works at the station was implemented earlier this year.
In response to the pause in construction activity at Euston, we have commenced work on so called “meanwhile uses” to determine what can be done to reduce the impact of the pause on the local community. We have an opportunity to use parts of the HS2 construction site to provide meaningful and active uses in order to maximise community benefits and generate social and economic value at Euston. This work is being undertaken in close co-operation with the London Borough of Camden, with a strong focus on local engagement to deliver community priorities. So far, we have delivered new green space for communities to enjoy, and we are looking to bring commercial operators and community organisations on board to boost economic and social activity in the area.
For the former 2a and 2b western leg sections, HS2 Ltd’s community engagement operation will focus on resolving any local uncertainty around works that are no longer required, or any restoration works that now need to take place.
HS2 Ltd’s community and business funds exist to support communities affected by construction. These funds are intended to leave a positive legacy long after construction is completed and to go beyond statutory compensation and committed mitigation schemes. So far, over £16.6 million of funding has been awarded across 293 local projects along the line of route. Recent awards have supported village hall refurbishments, new equipment for community groups, and the restoration of outdoor areas for nature and recreation.
The volume of anti-HS2 protestor activity continues to be low. There are currently no protestor sites that directly threaten delivery of HS2. An injunction prohibiting trespass on, and obstruction of access to, land acquired by HS2 Ltd was granted by the High Court in September 2022 and remains active along the route. Illegal protest has cost the project an estimated £38 million in direct costs and around £114 million in consequential costs, such as delays, to date. Of this, only £4 million has been added since HS2’s route-wide injunction was granted.
Land and property
The Government recognise that the changes set out in the Network North Command Paper will mean some people and communities will have had land and property purchased that is no longer needed for the revised scheme. We are committed to acting in good faith and for fair treatment for all affected—particularly those with transactions in progress—while protecting taxpayers appropriately.
Officials are working to formally lift phase 2a safeguarding within weeks and phase 2b safeguarding will be amended by summer 2024, to allow for any safeguarding needed for Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR). There will be no further compulsory purchase notices on phase 2a, or the non-NPR sections of phase 2b, and HS2 Ltd is not accepting new applications under the existing schemes from property owners in the areas where safeguarding is going to be lifted. Applications that are in progress will be handled on a case-by-case basis after consultation with the claimant. We are currently developing the programme for selling land acquired for HS2 that is no longer needed and will set out more details in due course. We will take time to develop this programme carefully to ensure it delivers value for money for taxpayers and does not disrupt local property markets. We will engage with the communities and individuals who are affected throughout this process.
Programme governance and controls
The Network North Command Paper set out the Government’s intention to provide strengthened governance and control while the changes to HS2 were implemented. In line with this, the Government are progressing work to:
support the HS2 Ltd executive chair, Sir Jon Thompson, and the HS2 Ltd board in strengthening accountabilities, governance and control within HS2 Ltd through a comprehensive change programme that he is leading;
re-emphasise the primary focus on delivering HS2 cost effectively and affordably as HS2 Ltd’s primary objective after safety;
support Sir Jon Thompson in appointing a highly capable chief executive focused on delivering HS2 to schedule and the revised budget;
review HS2 Ltd’s advice on its revised EAC once this has been adjusted for the changes required by Network North and to then set a revised funding envelope and target cost;
require HS2 Ltd to provide a detailed action plan setting out how it intends to work with the Government and its supply chain to deliver the remainder of HS2 at the lowest reasonable cost including shared assumptions and metrics to assess progress;
require HS2 Ltd to secure ministerial approval for any contract award decisions and contract changes that are above its agreed affordable budget; and
strengthen scrutiny of delivery, cost and schedule performance through a revised sponsor board with full participation from officials from HM Treasury (HMT) and the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA).
Alongside these immediate interventions, the Department is commissioning an independently led review of the control and assurance of the delivery of its major infrastructure projects. This will report to the Department for Transport, HMT and the IPA and consider how to improve the Government’s confidence on estimation, scope control, and adherence to schedule and budget of major schemes delivered by their arm’s length bodies, including how obstacles to cost-effective delivery can be reduced.
The ministerial taskforce provides strategic oversight, support and challenge for the successful delivery of HS2 and met on 1 November to discuss the latest performance management information, the cost estimate range for phase 1 and HS2 Ltd’s response to changes to the HS2 programme. It will meet again in December to consider improved management information and obstacles to delivering better value for money construction in the UK context.
The former HS2 Ltd chief executive, Mark Thurston left HS2 Ltd at the end of September. I am grateful to Sir Jon Thompson for taking on additional responsibilities in an executive chair capacity until a successor is in post. Sir Jon will continue to be supported at board level by deputy chair Elaine Holt. Recruiting a new chief executive is a priority for HS2 Ltd and the Department and we expect to be able to announce an appointment early in the new year.
Since my last report, the Secretary of State has also reappointed Ian King as a non-executive director for a further term on the HS2 Ltd board, and Joanna Davinson, Keith Smithson and Nelson Ogunshakin as new non-executive directors.
Forward look
In light of the Network North Command Paper, we will now proceed with the steps necessary to take these decisions forward.
We will continue to focus on the cost-effective delivery of HS2 phase 1 and redirect funding from the cancellation of later phases to the Network North programme. My Department will also begin developing a revised business case for the revised HS2 scheme.
I will provide further updates to Parliament on the development-led Euston project as it progresses.
On phase 2a, the Department will continue to work with HS2 Ltd to bring early/enabling site activities to a safe stop and conclude any land remediation activities for the handing back of sites.
On the phase 2b western leg, further work will consider legislative options for delivering Northern Powerhouse Rail, including whether elements of the High Speed Rail Bill can be repurposed to support delivery of this.
On HS2 east, a study (to be conducted as part of Network North) is being established to holistically consider connectivity in the midlands and connecting areas.
I will update Parliament once HS2 Ltd has revised estimates and new cost targets including any changes to the scope or the budget. Subject to the agreement across Government, I also intend to state this in both 2019 values (for comparison to the historic position) and in 2023 values (to show the cost in current terms and to reflect the recent period of high inflation).
Financial Annex 1
This annex reflects the current spend to date against the funding envelope agreed at notice to proceed in 2020. The phase 1 EAC work has identified challenges within the forward projections which still have uncertainty and are yet to be captured in these tables.
It should be noted that HMG conducted an efficiencies and savings review (ESR) earlier this year, with savings found across the Department, due to significant inflation and non-inflationary pressures on HS2. Following this, the 2023-24 budget was updated at main estimates to £6.5 billion. However, as was noted at main estimates, there remain substantial inflationary pressures on the programme, with full-year costs currently forecast by DfT and HS2 Ltd to be £8 billion, that will need to be resolved at supplementary estimates. As is standard, the mains budget and 2023-24 forecast are both presented in 2019 prices in this report, rather than cash prices, and therefore do not fully account for those remaining pressures. The Government will provide further details of the 2023-24 budget and forecast in cash terms as part of the standard supplementary estimates reporting to Parliament, which will also reflect the Network North announcement.
[HCWS34]
Passenger Rail: Minimum Service Levels
Huw Merriman Excerpts(6 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I am pleased to inform the House of the laying of The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels: Passenger Railway Services) Regulations 2023 before Parliament, following publication of the Department’s response to its consultation on implementing minimum service levels for passenger rail. This represents an important step towards meeting the Government’s manifesto commitment.
The Government are focused on making the hard but necessary long-term decisions that are in the best interests of the country, to put the UK on the right path for the future. The railways enable millions every day to travel to work, access vital services like education and healthcare, and visit family. They also provide choice about where to live and work. Passengers, however, are unable to go about their daily lives when unions take strike action. Rail workers deserve a fair deal, but it is not fair to let the trade unions undermine the livelihoods of others. Minimum service levels already operate in other countries, such as Italy, Spain, and others. There are a number of different approaches to deploying minimum service levels for transport and we have developed a specific approach that will work for passenger rail in the UK.
The Government are firmly committed to striking a fair balance between delivering benefits to passengers, supporting them to make important journeys, and the ability of rail workers to take strike action. The public need reliable and consistent services, and any strike action should not disproportionately impact this, or the wider economy.
The consultation response sets out the evidence received from the public consultation and further engagement, as well as the approach to specifying the relevant passenger rail services and designing the minimum service levels that can be applied to strikes affecting those services.
The regulations will apply in England, Scotland, and Wales and specify three categories of services that will be in scope: train operation services; infrastructure services; and light rail services. Each category has a separate MSL. We have designed the regulations in this manner to address the particular nature of strike action in passenger rail, while ensuring that minimum service levels are proportionate and operationally viable for in-scope employers, given the complex nature of the rail industry.
Relevant rail industry employers are able to make use of minimum service levels as soon as these regulations come into force, which is anticipated to be early December, subject to parliamentary approval.
[HCWS19]
Roads
Huw Merriman Excerpts(6 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I have been asked by the Secretary of State for Transport, my right hon. Friend the Member for Forest of Dean (Mr Harper), to make this written statement. This statement confirms that it has been necessary to extend the deadline for the decision on the application by National Highways under the Planning Act 2008 for the A66 Northern Trans-Pennine Development Consent Order.
Under section 107(1) of the Planning Act 2008, the Secretary of State must make his decision within three months of receipt of the Examining Authority’s report unless exercising the power under section 107(3) to extend the deadline and make a statement to the House of Parliament announcing the new deadline.
The Secretary of State received the Examining Authority’s report on the A66 Northern Trans-Pennine Development Consent Order application on 7 August 2023. The current deadline for a decision is therefore 7 November 2023.
The deadline for the decision is to be extended to 7 March 2024—an extension of four months.
The reason for the extension is to allow for further consideration of matters including those not resolved at the time the Examining Authority’s report was received by the Secretary of State. This will include the consideration of information submitted by the applicant regarding impacts on the North Pennine Moors Special Area of Conservation, to ensure compliance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.
The decision to set a new deadline is without prejudice to the decision on whether to give development consent for the above application.
[HCWS5]
Oral Answers to Questions
Huw Merriman Excerpts(6 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
The Network North announcement included commitments to rail improvements at Ely and Haughley junctions, which is a key priority for the east and also for railfreight. We are also committed to the A10 scheme north of Cambridge. The east will also benefit from the £8.3 billion announced for highways maintenance funding across England.
James Wild
I warmly welcome the commitment to upgrade Ely Junction, which will boost passenger services to King’s Lynn in my constituency, as well as freight. I am sure my hon. Friend will ensure that the scheme now proceeds as rapidly as possible. May I also urge Ministers to approve the business case submitted by Norfolk County Council for the A10 West Winch housing access road, which is essential to unlock housing, reduce congestion and boost growth?
Huw Merriman
As ever, my hon. Friend is bang on when it comes to the Ely project. It is a superb project, which really delivers for freight and ensures that freight can travel from Felixstowe across the midlands, rather than having to go south. So I can assure hon. Members that we will be on that project and getting it delivered.
On my hon. Friend’s point on the A10, which I welcome, officials are currently assessing the outline business case submitted by Norfolk County Council, and will be providing advice to Ministers in due course. We will ensure that we are in touch with my hon. Friend as soon as a decision has been made.
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
The Government’s Network North announcement included £2.5 billion of investment for the West Yorkshire mass transit system, building on the £200 million already provided to the West Yorkshire Combined Authority, which is developing the business case. I look forward to reviewing that and bringing the benefits of mass transit to the West Yorkshire region.
Fabian Hamilton
Less than 40% of the population of Leeds can now reach the city centre by public transport within 30 minutes. We have been promised and promised a public rail-based transport system by this Government for years, and yet we still remain the largest city in Europe without one. Will the Minister tell the people of Leeds why we should believe him this time?
Huw Merriman
I will take that as a welcome for the £2.5 billion commitment in Network North. As the hon. Member rightly says, Leeds would no longer be the largest city in Europe without a mass transit system. What we are looking to do with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority is create a network of up to seven lines, which will eventually connect Leeds with Huddersfield, Wakefield, Bradford and Halifax. Work is going on, because £200 million has already been committed. I had a meeting with the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and the West Yorkshire Combined Authority to discuss the plans and proposals. The combined authority is working at pace and we are going to fund it.
Darren Henry (Broxtowe) (Con)
Nottinghamshire previously submitted a levelling-up bid for a new Toton link road but narrowly missed out. The project—
Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
The Government remain committed to improving rail access to Heathrow airport, and recognise the importance of the improved rail connectivity that a western rail link could provide. We need to ensure that projects that we take forward reflect the changed shape of rail demand and are affordable. I understand that, as a consequence, the promoters of a western rail link are updating their proposal.
Mr Dhesi
You will be aware, Mr Speaker, that I have long championed a western rail link to Heathrow, which would connect 20% of the UK population to within one interchange of our nation’s main airport. The Government committed to it over a decade ago, yet not a single spade has dug into the ground. Sadly, the Government have more of a reputation for cancelling rail links than for building them. Perhaps the rail Minister, who kindly met me recently about the issue, will have better news for us today. What meetings has he had with Heathrow airport, Thames Valley chamber of commerce and other stakeholders to progress this vital 4 mile rail link between Slough and Heathrow?
Huw Merriman
May I first thank the former shadow rail Minister for the times that we had together? It is true that he has been a champion of this project, and indeed pretty much every other rail project that I have gone to an all-party parliamentary group for, where he had already agreed to pre-fund it. I assume that now he is a shadow Treasury Minister he might be cancelling some of his previous decisions in a bid for fiscal credibility.
This particular project was due to be funded 50:50, but things have changed post pandemic for Heathrow, so it is right that it goes back to the drawing board. We will always support rail investments that can be paid for by private enterprise. That is what our Network North project is all about.
Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I regularly meet with Network Rail and train operators to discuss rail performance and services. Twickenham has seen positive results. In the past 12 weeks, an average of 88.1% of trains across the lines serving Twickenham have arrived within three minutes of the stated time.
Munira Wilson
I thank the Minister for that answer. If we want to encourage more people to use our railways we need to ensure that our stations are properly staffed so that they are accessible and safe for all, and that all complex tickets can be purchased easily, yet the Government are backing South Western Railway’s plans to slash staffing hours at stations across my constituency, in some cases by up to 80% in very heavily used stations. Will the Minister heed the advice of the Transport Committee, which has said this week that ticket office closure plans are moving “too far, too fast”, and his own statement that he does not expect a material reduction in hours, and stop these plans in their tracks?
Huw Merriman
I always take onboard the advice of the Transport Committee, because it does a great job and always has done. On ticket offices, these are industry proposals, which, pursuant to the process set out in the ticketing and settlement agreement, are currently being consulted on between the train operators and the passenger bodies. We expect that consultation stage to conclude shortly. I have made it clear at this Dispatch Box, and the Secretary of State has also been clear, that this should be a redeployment and multi-skilling of staff exercise to enhance the passenger experience.
Greg Smith (Buckingham) (Con)
Serious overcrowding persists on Chiltern railway services serving my constituents, particularly at rush hours and weekends. The long-term solution is whole-fleet renewal, but there are some short-term fixes that Chiltern is asking for, such as being permitted to bring its extra set of Class 68s back into use. Can my hon. Friend assure me that he is doing everything possible at pace with Chiltern to improve rail services for my constituents?
Huw Merriman
My hon. Friend is another excellent member of the Transport Committee, and he always champions the need for more capacity on his busy railway lines. He is accurate: overcrowding is becoming an increasing concern for Chiltern, which is assessing options to mitigate the issue, such as further utilisation of the Class 68 units in and out of Marylebone to maximise capacity. There are issues with the diesel fleet, but we want to ensure that we can continue to provide the service for his Chiltern customers. In the longer term, I know that Chiltern is working with the rolling stock company providers to assess hybrid trains, with an aim to moving away from diesel.
Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)
Fresh from slashing and burning HS2 while in Manchester and spouting crank conspiracy theories, the Secretary of State announced Network North. However, that dodgy sounding 1970s ITV franchise does not have a single project with an approved business case, and plans are valued at 2019 prices. There was no promise to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain) a minute ago. Network North is literally not worth the paper it is written on, is it, Minister?
Huw Merriman
It most certainly is. When the Prime Minister announced Network North, it was clear that we were going to see a plethora of rail projects and, indeed, wider projects. We will better connect the major cities of the north, we will invest £2 billion so that Bradford can finally get the new station that it deserves and, as I have stated, we will add £2.5 billion to the West Yorkshire mass transit system. There is a huge amount of projects that we should all be celebrating, across parties. It is interesting that the Opposition seem to be knocking these opportunities to better connect cities across the north and the country.
When it comes to business cases, the Ely and Haughley project, for example, has an outline business case of 4.6. We know that business cases are stronger when there are local transport opportunities. My question back to the Opposition Front-Bench team is whether they support these proposals, in which case they should ride behind them and be positive about them—or do they not want better transport networks across the north, the midlands and the rest of the country?
Duncan Baker (North Norfolk) (Con)
Anna Firth (Southend West) (Con)
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I am very happy to meet my hon. Friend. Chalkwell, Ockendon and Southend East remain within the Access for All programme. We have delivered 230 stations and we will deliver those three as well. We had an issue with the contractor putting in a cost estimate that was about double what I would expect; that is why we have had to look anew, but I will very happily meet my hon. Friend to discuss this further, and she has that commitment. We will deliver it.
Peter Grant (Glenrothes) (SNP)
Huw Merriman
It comes down to choices. We could have chosen to continue with HS2, which would not have delivered the value we need, with time overrunning, or we could have done as the Scottish National party did when it built two ferries at a shipyard that had been nationalised, going four times over budget and running seven years late. Alternatively, we could have done as it did on the tram—described by the Edinburgh tram inquiry as a “litany of avoidable failures”. When there are choices to be made, the SNP ploughs on regardless.
John Penrose (Weston-super-Mare) (Con)
Huw Merriman
I thank my hon. Friend for everything he does to push for more open access. It is something the Secretary of State and I are keen to do. I met this week with the Office of Rail and Road chief executive, our regulator, and we discussed what he can do to allow more open-access applications, and what we can do, and we then met with another bidder. There is another service planned with regard to Wales on the western line, and there is also one in the offing that could work on CrossCountry, plus one for the channel tunnel. I hope my hon. Friend will keep on working with me. We want to deliver them.
Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab)
The Government’s mishandling of HS2 was and is absolutely staggering, but their attempt to pull the wool over northern eyes with Network North is a farce. Does the Minister really believe the people of the north-east are falling for his fag-end fake network to nowhere?
Huw Merriman
I just do not accept that at all. I gave a run through of a list of the £36 billion that is being put back into local projects, including £1.8 billion extra for the north-east. That could, for example, be an option for the Leamside line to be reopened. I would have thought that, rather than stating that none of this is going to happen, the hon. Member would be holding us to account to make sure it does, and that she might actually support investment. There will be as much investment—indeed, more—in all areas.
Marco Longhi (Dudley North) (Con)
Patricia Gibson (North Ayrshire and Arran) (SNP)
When a memorandum of understanding on HS2 to Scotland was agreed by the then Transport Secretary, Philip Hammond, HS2 planners claimed that reducing journey times between Scotland and London to three hours could boost passenger numbers by 4 million and increase rail’s share of passengers making that journey from 29% to 75%, reducing air travel emissions. What is the Secretary of State’s new prediction for rail passenger numbers making that journey?
Huw Merriman
I will happily write to the hon. Lady with the details she requires, but I restate that it comes down to choices. The choice that this Government have made is to go forward with transport projects across the entirety of the country that can deliver faster and better benefits and that have a better business case. That is why this decision has been made.
Sir Michael Ellis (Northampton North) (Con)
Does my right hon. Friend think that people of the Jewish faith are safe on the London underground? I have to tell him that many Jews in London do not feel safe. Does he agree that London Underground employees who misuse Transport for London equipment to take part in intimidatory acts should not only be disciplined for gross misconduct, but considered for prosecution for causing harassment, alarm and distress under the Public Order Act 1986?
Sara Britcliffe (Hyndburn) (Con)
The reopening of the Skipton to Colne railway line, which is about 11 miles of missing track, will be fundamental in linking Lancashire and Yorkshire back up. Will the Minister consider progressing this line to the next phase of the rail network enhancements pipeline, which includes drawing up a full business case for reinstatement? Will he meet me and Members including our right hon. Friend the Member for Pendle (Andrew Stephenson) and our hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Antony Higginbotham) to discuss it further?
Huw Merriman
I would be pleased to meet my hon. Friend and all right hon. and hon. Friends. The Department has been working with Transport for the North, Lancashire County Council and the Skipton East Lancashire Rail Action Partnership campaign group to strengthen the case for reopening that line, but we will meet up and discuss that further.
Stephanie Peacock (Barnsley East) (Lab)
In answer to the hon. Member for Sheffield South East (Mr Betts), the bus Minister, the hon. Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden) said that the Mayor of South Yorkshire had asked for £8 million to restore bus services. In fact, the Mayor asked for £8 million to restore bus services to 2022 levels—so just restoring those cut in the past year. Will the Minister take this opportunity to look again at the level of funding that South Yorkshire requires?
Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Reclaim)
I declare an interest in that I sold my house in North West Leicestershire to HS2 in 2015 for considerably less than I paid for it in 2011. What does the Secretary of State make of the evidence given to the media by Andrew Bruce, the former head of land acquisitions for HS2, that people were short-changed and not given full value for their properties up and down the route?
Huw Merriman
There are rules that specify how the safeguarded land will be returned. Those who sold their property will be offered it back at the current market value. We expect those matters to take place towards the summer. With regard to the hon. Member’s allegations, I will discuss them further with him so that I am fully furnished of the case.
Mary Robinson (Cheadle) (Con)
Last year, my constituent was having a drink with his son, having attended a Manchester City match, when his son was glassed in the face in an unprovoked attack. The assault took place in a pub outside Manchester Piccadilly within the jurisdiction of British Transport police. Since then, despite CCTV capturing a clear image of the suspect, no arrests have been made. My constituent feels disappointed that the transport police have not got justice for his son, who suffered life- changing injuries. Will my right hon. Friend meet me to discuss this distressing case and, more widely, to consider the remit and resourcing of British Transport police?
Huw Merriman
I am sorry to hear about that incident; it must have been incredibly distressing for my hon. Friend’s constituent. I will raise that case specifically with British Transport police, and I would be pleased to meet my hon. Friend to discuss it further.
International Rail Services: Kent
Huw Merriman Excerpts(6 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford (Damian Green) for securing the debate on this important issue, which is very close to my heart; I am a constituency neighbour to my hon. Friend the Member for Hastings and Rye (Sally-Ann Hart), who made an intervention, and my right hon. Friend is of course just across the border from me in Kent.
My right hon. Friend has worked tirelessly in campaigning on this matter on behalf of the people of Ashford and the wider Kent area, and I salute him for his work. As I mentioned, as the Member for a constituency that is not too far away from his, I share my right hon. Friend’s disappointment that Ebbsfleet and Ashford stations do not currently receive international services. I fully recognise the important benefits that high-speed international rail services provide for the areas and communities they serve, including for people and businesses in Kent and its surrounds. I should state that I was a frequent user of the service, having come across the coastline from East Sussex to Kent, and I would like to be able to do that again.
Gareth Johnson (Dartford) (Con)
Some 18 months ago, my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford (Damian Green) and I met the chief executive of Eurostar, and to say that it was frustrating is an understatement. It is frankly madness that we have international stations at Ebbsfleet and Ashford but people cannot travel from them internationally. Will my hon. Friend the Minister do all he can, through his Department, to ensure that international services are restored both at Ashford and at Ebbsfleet in my constituency?
Huw Merriman
I can provide my hon. Friend with that assurance. I have a real passion for this subject and am particularly keen to see those international stations become international stations again. I praise my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford for his work on Ashford station, and I praise my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Gareth Johnson) for his work on behalf of his constituents for the return of Ebbsfleet station. Both Members work incredibly hard and I am keen to see that work rewarded.
High-speed international rail services provide major benefits in terms of the connections they provide and the fact that they are environmentally friendly links to our European neighbours, as my right hon. Friend pointed out. Let me give some context. Before the pandemic, Eurostar was carrying record passenger numbers, with more than 11 million passengers per year, and held a market share of around 80% of journeys between London and each of Paris and Brussels. Given the significant benefits, and recognising that rail is currently a significantly lower-carbon option compared with other modes of transport for international travel, with emissions as much as 80% lower on some routes compared with air equivalents, it is in our interest to ensure the long-term sustainability of the services.
Unfortunately, as we know, the travel industry was severely impacted by covid-19, facing unprecedented challenges, and the sector continues to manage and respond to the impacts of that today. Eurostar passenger numbers collapsed to 5% of 2019 levels for much of the pandemic, and revenue was cut by around 95% for 15 months in 2020-2021. Eurostar therefore made difficult decisions to cut services and consolidate its service offer. That was an entirely commercial decision taken by the operator. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford noted, Eurostar is a non-franchised operator, so it does not receive UK Government subsidies.
During the pandemic, the Government worked very closely with Eurostar—as we did with the travel industry more broadly—to support it in accessing the cross-economy support schemes for which it was eligible. Indeed, I recall that the Transport Committee—when I was wearing my previous hat—leaned strongly into that particular issue and did its best to ensure that Eurostar had that support. That is why I am now looking for Eurostar’s support in return, as I wear a different hat.
The Department engaged extensively with Eurostar throughout that period to consider the specific challenges facing the company, but the company ultimately secured financing on commercial terms from its lenders and shareholders. I, too, am very disappointed to see that, despite a strong recovery in demand for travel, Eurostar is yet to reinstate services from Ebbsfleet and Ashford. Since I became rail Minister, I have personally raised that with Eurostar, making it absolutely clear that I am keen to see those services return as soon as it is possible and commercially viable for the company to do so. I agree with my right hon. Friend that there are some good arguments for why that commercial rationale exists. However, I recognise that it is an entirely commercial decision for Eurostar, given that international services operate on a solely commercial basis.
My right hon. Friend raised the entry and exit system. I recognise that there are challenges at the border, as he noted. The Home Office is the lead Department on that, but my Department is supporting engagement with our European partners and portals, including Eurostar, to help reduce the impacts as much as possible. Indeed, that is another matter that I recall the Transport Committee raising as one of concern with certain dates looming—my right hon. Friend noted that they have been moved. I will certainly make the case for Kent stations when we have those discussions with our European partners, as he asks of me.
I note my right hon. Friend’s important point concerning the financial contribution from taxpayers and local partners to ensure that Eurostar’s newest trains could serve the station. I recognise his disappointment given the years of work to enhance the station and the unfortunate timing in the light of the pandemic. I back his call for that investment to deliver a return for UK taxpayers. However, thanks to that investment, Ashford remains well placed to accommodate any modern high-speed train that may be used by Eurostar, or any new entrant seeking to compete with Eurostar, in future. On that note, it is important to highlight the prospect of greater competition to Eurostar in the future, which could be beneficial for passengers in Kent, depending on commercial decisions taken by any new entrant. As my right hon. Friend made clear, at least one potential competitor has publicised its ambitions to launch services to directly compete with Eurostar in the coming years.
I have been clear that competition on the railways can deliver real benefits for passengers by providing greater choice and lower prices. It would also be an important step in improving the prospects of services returning to Kent stations. My right hon. Friend is absolutely right: there is capacity on that line. I would dearly love to see another operator bringing competition and stopping at those Kent stations. Department officials are engaging regularly with infrastructure managers and European partners to discuss the potential for new services and routes, particularly to address the unique requirements of operating through the channel tunnel. They also stand ready to work with and support potential new entrants through those challenges. Indeed, just today, I was talking about open access and what we can do to bring more competitors on. I will ensure that that is not just domestic: if I have my way, it will be international as well.
I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford again for raising this important matter in the House. I also recognise the contributions and work of the other Members who have spoken: my hon. Friends the Members for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French) and for Hastings and Rye, and my right hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Sir Robert Goodwill). Like my right hon. Friend the Member for Ashford and all those who have spoken, I am keen to see international services return to Kent as soon as possible and when it is commercially viable. My officials and I will work tirelessly on this matter, and will continue to press for this change in my dealings with our industry partners.
Question put and agreed to.
Railway Stations in Cumbria: Staffing Changes
Huw Merriman Excerpts(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Huw Merriman)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McDonagh. I thank the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) for securing this important debate on staffing changes and ticket offices in his constituency. I know from a chance meeting with him in his constituency that he works hard for his constituents. I was walking in the Lake district and stumbled across a “Meet your MP” sign—and there he was, so we turned it into “Meet your MP and someone else’s MP.” I thank him for his kind words at the opening of the debate.
Together with the rail industry, we want to improve and modernise the experience for passengers by moving staff out from behind the ticket office screens to provide more help and advice in customer-focused roles. There are currently about 980 Department for Transport-regulated ticket offices for stations managed by the Department for Transport-contracted operators; 43% of them currently do not have any ticket office facility. People are still able to use those stations to access trains.
There has been a huge shift in the way passengers purchase tickets at railway stations: about one in every 10 transactions in 2022-23 took place in a ticket office, down from about one in three 10 years ago. Despite that, our stations have hardly changed in the past 10 years, which means that staff are constrained to work in ticket offices although they could serve passengers better on station platforms and concourses, where all the passengers could be served.
I am pleased that the rail industry launched consultations on the future of ticket offices under the ticketing and settlement agreement process, which gave the public and stakeholders an opportunity to scrutinise the train operating companies’ proposals to ensure that they work in the best possible way for passengers. The consultations, which ended on 1 September, yielded more than 680,000 responses. We are now in a period in which the independent passenger bodies, which comprise Transport Focus and London TravelWatch, are engaging with the train operators on the basis of the consultation responses that they have received and the criteria that they have set out.
I expect train operators to work collaboratively with the passenger bodies in the remaining weeks, to respond to the concerns raised and to define their proposals accordingly. Where agreement cannot be reached between the operators and the passenger bodies, individual cases may be referred to the Secretary of State for Transport for a decision. At that point, he will look to the Secretary of State’s ticketing and settlement agreement ticket office guidance. The TSA guidance is clear that a wide range of factors should be considered, including the impact of proposals on customer support, security at stations, modernised retail practices such as the availability of pay-as-you-go ticketing, and support for passengers with disabilities, accessibility or other equalities-related needs.
It remains important that we reform the railway to enable staff to provide a more flexible, agile and personal service, creating the modern experience that people expect. We should also look for ways to ensure value for money for the UK taxpayer. I know from listening to constituents and parliamentarians that there is indeed interest in what will happen to ticket office staff, should there be any changes. Indeed, as part of my visit across the railway over the summer, I visited Appleby station in the constituency of the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale, as he said.
The changes are about modernising the passenger experience by moving expert ticket office staff to be more visible and accessible around the station. As only 10% of tickets are sold across the ticket office counter, that means that most passengers are not in contact with ticket office staff. The idea is to take the member of staff on to the platform or concourse to help the passengers where they need it. That includes purchasing tickets via a ticket machine or online.
As the hon. Member mentioned, I reiterated at the last Westminster Hall debate, which was secured by my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset (Chris Loder), that—crucially—the Secretary of State and I have been clear that our expectation is that no currently staffed stations will be unstaffed as a result of the reform, with staff still there to provide assistance and additional support for those who need and want it. That includes advice on tickets and assistance in buying them. I also reiterated that I do not expect a material reduction in the number of hours where ticketing expertise is available at stations in the manner that some have described and that the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale set out for the stations in his own constituency. I expect that by the end of the consultation process, there will be a differing design. When we talk about redeployment, it is important to note that the volume of hours should be similar to what we currently have. He will no doubt make note of those words.
Should ticket offices close following the process, we would expect staff to be redeployed and multi-skilled to provide advice and assistance across stations. Exact arrangements will vary operator by operator and will be the subject of collective bargaining with the trade unions. It is vital that our railway is accessible to all, and I have engaged directly with accessibility groups and will continue to do so. Alongside that, train operators are required to take into account the adequacy of the proposed alternatives in relation to the needs of passengers who are disabled, and to include that in the notice of the proposals sent to other operators and passenger groups. Operators had prepared equality impact assessments, and they were available on their websites during the consultation.
The Office of Rail and Road’s latest annual consumer report highlights that Passenger Assist booking has significantly increased since last year and that disabled people have returned to the railway largely in line with overall trends. For that reason, I firmly believe that the proposal to bring staff out from behind glass screens, to help the increased number of people who need assistance from the platform on to trains, is a step in the right direction in terms of the multi-skilling roles that I have described.
I reiterate that by bringing station staff out from behind the ticket office screen, we envisage an improved and modernised experience for passengers using the railways. It is vital that we bring forward reforms through considering changes in passenger behaviour, involving technologies and ensuring value for money for the taxpayer, while ensuring that assistance and support continue for those who require it most. I look forward to the process continuing in the design stage that I have described.
Question put and agreed to.