Railways Bill

Debate between Jen Craft and Melanie Ward

Report stage
Wednesday 10th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)]

This Bill represents a once-in-a-generation chance to create a simpler, more effective and more accountable railway. I am pleased that c2c, which serves my constituents in Thurrock, was one of the first operators to come under public ownership. I look forward to the reversal of 30 years of privatisation, which have seen fragmentation, outsourcing and a dangerous lack of investment in infrastructure. Nationalisation and the establishment of Great British Railways will allow us to protect the long-term future of our railways, putting passengers first, not profit.

When we commit to putting passengers first, however, that must mean all passengers. That is why I strongly support amendments 70 and 71, proposed by the Chair of the Transport Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury). Last year, the Transport Committee released a worrying report on access to public transport by disabled people. The Committee estimated that more than one third of disabled people were regularly avoiding travel because they believed it would be too complicated, too unsafe, or things would be too likely to go wrong.

The amendments would require a commitment from Great British Railways and a proposed passenger council not simply to consider the interests of disabled users, but to carry out their responsibilities in a way that actively promotes their interests. Accessibility must not be viewed through the same lens as customer service, where minor delays or engineering faults are considered irritating but, unfortunately, normal. Accessibility failures should be incredible rare, and failures to meet standards should be regarded as a serious infraction of people’s rights.

[Melanie Ward]

My hon. Friend is making some important points about railway accessibility, which is also an issue for my constituents, particularly at the railway stations in Burntisland, Cowdenbeath and Kinghorn. That is why I added my name to new clause 23, which would have introduced a strategy to ensure full railway accessibility across the country within the next 10 years. We have been waiting far too long for our railways to be accessible. We need action now.

[Jen Craft]

I completely agree. We have waited since the inception of the railways for them to be accessible. As anyone who, like me, is a bit of a rail geek and enjoys a trip on a stream train of a weekend will know, railways in the past were not designed with access for all in mind, and we can and must do better.

If a train station lift breaks overnight, wheelchair users who travel regularly on the train might find themselves in a position where they are unable to travel to work or school, visit family or get to their local hospital. That is not inconvenient; it is unacceptable. The lifts are currently out of service at Tilbury in my constituency, and the solution that is being offered is for people to travel on to the next stop, change trains, go round and come back. It is completely and utterly unacceptable. This sentiment is not reflected in the way we currently talk or think about service provision for disabled people. We urgently need a change of mindset, recognising that accessibility is a non-negotiable matter—it is the bare minimum.

At my local station in Grays, we have been waiting for operational lifts for years. Although c2c received a grant under the Access for All scheme, the lifts have been a categorical failure. As the fourth most used station in the east of England and a busy transport hub, it should have the proper infrastructure. The lifts were initially promised for late 2024, but they were not delivered until August 2025. They did not work—in fact, they have never worked. They frequently break down. Now, due to quite a lot of persistence from me, they are finally being torn out and replaced.

This has had a significant impact on my disabled constituents. One woman told me that she was trapped in a lift for 35 minutes and had to be removed by firefighters, while another told me that her husband is reluctant to use the station because he has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and struggles with stairs. It is just such a shame that these brand-new lifts, which were promised under an access scheme, are out of order so very often.

I am very pleased that the Bill will bring Network Rail, which is responsible for providing, servicing and now replacing these lifts, into Great British Railways. It is absolutely right that the organisation becomes part of a unified, publicly owned body that is accountable to all the passengers who rely on it. I am hopeful that this added accountability will help to foster genuine progress on accessibility.

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Debate between Jen Craft and Melanie Ward

Report stage
Friday 20th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)]

I rise to speak in opposition to the Bill. Today, we are voting not on the principle of assisted dying, but on a piece of legislation. We do not exist in a vacuum; what happens in this House has real-world consequences.

I am all too aware of how unequal our society, our medical system and our institutions are in their treatment of disabled people. My hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham North (Vicky Foxcroft) spoke at length, very movingly, of her journey towards finding that she could not vote for the Bill due to her experience and prolonged engagement with disabled people and disabled people’s organisations.

I know from my own experience that the value our medical establishment places on certain lives is less than on others. When I was given the diagnosis of my daughter’s Down’s syndrome, the first thing the midwife said to me after, “I’m so sorry,” was, “I can book you a termination within 48 hours.” That is a choice that so many women make because they are ignorant of the value of disabled lives. I have had to fight for so many things for my daughter, because the establishment does not see her life as valuable. In this country, someone can terminate a pregnancy up to 39 weeks and six days if they have a condition that is so horrific, such as Down’s syndrome, cleft palate or limb difference, because of the value we place on different lives.

I support the principle of assisted dying, yes, but I cannot support this Bill because we cannot legislate against discrimination and we cannot legislate out inherent bias. What we can do is legislate for safeguards and for safety. We can legislate over those treating the people we love and over those offering assisted dying. We can legislate to make sure that the most vulnerable in society, such as my daughter—people who I know the medical establishment and institutions and society already view as second-class in so many ways—do not have to face a decision after being coerced or given bad advice. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) has been at pains to point out to me and others, we do not have the adequate safeguards in place.

[Melanie Ward]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Jen Craft]

I am afraid I will make progress, but I thank her for her interruption. [Laughter.] Her intervention, my apologies. We have been told that there are panels that will provide a safeguard and take into account all of someone’s circumstances, and whether they have capacity. However, those panels may in exceptional circumstances—the Bill does not set out what those are—opt not to even meet the person whom they are discussing. We know that the panels do not allow for family members and carers and those who know that person—if they have limited capacity, a learning disability or are unable to make certain decisions themselves—to play a role in that process or have any right of appeal.

My plea to Members across this House, if you have not yet decided or if you think, “I support this in principle, but I am concerned about this, have worries about this or think that might be okay,” is that it is not our role to send a Bill to the other place and out into the world, hoping that others will do our job for us and that it will all just come out in the wash. That is a dereliction of our duty as Members of Parliament. If you have any concerns about this Bill, now is the time to vote against it. You must do that. You must not think that someone else will do your job for you. It is our decision. That is what we are voting on today. I urge all Members of this House to vote against this Bill.