Railways Bill

Monica Harding Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 10th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Keir Mather]

The right hon. Lady is right to say that I am well aware of the specific measure that she speaks to. Having the relationship between GBR, the mayors and political representatives in Westminster, such as herself, is critical, and it is part of the purpose of GBR to better facilitate those conversations. I am sure that, through its establishment, she can take forward the debate on this particular matter with her usual passion.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

rose—

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[Julia Buckley (Shrewsbury) (Lab)]

I thank the Ministers both here and in the other place for their hard work and engagement on this important Bill. I will focus my comments in favour of new clause 16.

Great British Railways cannot come soon enough for my constituency of Shrewsbury. Under privatisation, our geography has penalised us, as we sit on the edge of everyone’s maps between regional operators serving either Wales or Birmingham, leaving us under-invested and underserved. As Members may recall—I have mentioned it quite a few times—Shropshire remains the only county without a direct train to London. The value of such a direct service is not just the obvious economic boost for jobs, education and tourism, or the improved accessibility of avoiding step-heavy connections, but the important investment in infrastructure that inter-city services could unlock at our station. We need more frequent and reliable regional services, with much more capacity to cope with the vast demand for services for a county town of 70,000 residents. For example, our local university campus closed last year, and students now have to travel beyond Shrewsbury to access education, training and employment.

For these reasons, I am pleased to put my name in support of five amendments, including new clause 16, which calls for the reopening of services to underserved areas. This new clause calls for GBR to establish a department for the purpose of identifying areas underserved and unserved by railway services, and to assess passenger and community needs for adding services, routes or stations where they are missing. It is crucial that the full opportunities of this new integrated, nationalised railway are felt across the whole country by improving service levels in underserved and often rural areas such as Shropshire, not just adding increased frequency for already well-served cities. Just last month, Madam Deputy Speaker, you will recall that I stood in this very place to present a petition signed by over 10,000 fare-paying passengers asking this Government to recognise the demand for a direct train service at Shrewsbury and to approve extra routes to London.

As we stand together on the cusp of nationalising our rail system, we must ensure that the mantra of “people before profit” becomes a reality in places such as Shrewsbury. Where investment has been lacking, let us take this opportunity to rebuild; where services have withered away, let us deliver for our communities; and where towns have been left behind, let us reconnect them. In short, let us show in deeds, not words, how Great British Railways will deliver more services for more places such as Shrewsbury.

[Monica Harding]

I rise in support of new clause 1, on the passengers’ charter, new clause 3, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover), and my own new clause 60, which addresses reliability, accessibility and refurbishment.

All seven of my railway stations in Esher and Walton are under the stewardship of South Western Railway, making our constituency one of the first to experience the transition to public ownership, and there are significant reliability challenges. The latest performance figures show that, in March, 3% of all services were cancelled and only 65% of services arrived on time, meaning more than one in three trains fail to arrive when passengers expected them to.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

I have statistics for Worcester Park station, which is also served by South Western Railway, and in the very last period before nationalisation—period 2 for 2025-26—punctuality was 89.3%, which is still not good enough, and cancellations was 1%. In all the periods since then, performance has been worse. Under nationalisation, Worcester Park has seen a worse service in every single period. Does my hon. Friend agree that our residents, particularly those of Worcester Park, do not care if a train turns up wrapped in a Union flag, but about whether that train is on time and not cancelled?

[Monica Harding]

They 100% do care and that is why we should support new clause 1.

It would also help if constituents could access the railway in the first place. Investment in making our stations accessible for all need to be at the very heart of the programme of rail reform. Hersham and Hinchley Wood stations are completely without step-free access, while Walton, Claygate, Esher and Thames Ditton only have partial step-free access. That is why I tabled new clause 60, requiring Great British Railways to undertake and publish an assessment of the accessibility barriers at Hersham and Hinchley Wood stations. I am also pleased to support new clause 2, which does the same, requiring the Secretary of State to publish an accessibility strategy for the railway network.

That brings me to Hersham station, because accessibility failures there sit alongside something much more fundamental, which new clause 3 would address. Hersham supports around 700,000 passengers every year in one of the busiest rail corridors in the country, in a constituency that contributes more to the Exchequer than any other constituency outside London. Thousands of people pass through the station every week to run businesses, create jobs and drive economic growth. The state of that station is an affront to every single one of them. It is an eyesore: ramshackle and neglected, mould climbs the fence lines, the paintwork is peeling and the station sits under exposed corrugated iron roofing. More seriously, both platforms were built in the 1960s using materials that were only ever intended to be temporary. More than half a century later, they are still there. Groups of schoolchildren step off the train and put their feet through the platform. Constituents have repeatedly raised safety concerns. The stairs visibly move beneath their feet. These passengers are not asking for luxury; they are asking for a station that is safe.

There is nothing in the Bill that will give my residents in Hersham a station that they can be proud of. I therefore urge the Minister to look seriously at new clause 3, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Didcot and Wantage, which would establish a tomorrow’s railway fund, enabling local authorities to bid for funding for new stations, infrastructure and feasibility studies. This is exactly the kind of mechanism that stations and wealth creators in Hersham need.

All my constituents are asking for are trains that run on time, stations they can actually get into and infrastructure that is safe to use. Performance, accessibility and condition are not separate issues. They are three sides of the same failure and the Bill must address all three. I urge the Minister to accept the amendments and show that Great British Railways will finally deliver a railway worthy of the people who depend on it every day.

[Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)]

The Bill is a necessary and long-overdue step towards bringing our railways back into public ownership. Great British Railways represents a real opportunity to build a railway that works in the interests of passengers and staff, rather than profiteering companies and distant shareholders.

For railway workers, the transition to GBR must be an opportunity to strengthen good, secure and unionised jobs across the sector. Rail staff are the backbone of the network. Whether they work on trains, in stations, or on signalling, engineering or maintenance, they keep this country moving every single day.

I also want to commend the work of campaign groups such as We Own It, alongside the rails unions the RMT, the TSSA and ASLEF, for their long-standing commitment to the renationalisation of our railways. Working constructively with the trade unions will be vital if GBR is to succeed. A publicly owned railway must also be a railway built on a partnership with its workforce.

The transport unions have raised a number of concerns that the Government should address. Tens of thousands of rail workers still do not know exactly who their future employer will be under GBR, nor do they know what pension arrangements will apply. There are also real fears about potential job losses linked to the transition. Around 870 Network Rail staff are reportedly at risk of redundancy and are concerned at de-recognition of trade unions during the TUPE transfer from Network Rail into its wholly owned public subsidiary, Platform4. A fundamental principle of the transition from private to public ownership should be that every workplace within GBR recognises trade unions.

My now-withdrawn new clause largely spoke to Beeching. The Beeching cuts, now widely recognised as a significant failure, saw the closure of up to 2,363 stations and approximately 5,000 miles of track. It severed vital links for many communities, causing lasting damage to local economies. That is felt all too acutely in Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr, where we have a huge gap between Caersws and Machynlleth—the longest stretch of line without a station in the whole of Wales.