Industrial Action on the Railways Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Transport

Industrial Action on the Railways

Viscount Younger of Leckie Excerpts
Monday 20th June 2022

(2 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Well, that is marvellous; I have only just started my response, so if the noble Baroness could just hold her horses, that would be brilliant. Let us get back to the questions that she asked and indeed to the Government’s Statement. At face value, it is indeed the case that the current Rail Minister and her predecessor have met the unions in the past to press the need for reforms, and to outline the reforms set out in the Williams-Shapps plan for rail about the establishment of Great British Railways, changes to terms and conditions, modernising railway and creating this fantastic thing that we all want. But this was not part of the negotiations, because the negotiations are between the employer and the unions, as they have always been. That does not mean that the Government do not take great interest in the negotiations—we want to see an increase in pay—but it has to be done fairly, between the passengers, the taxpayer and the workers.

There are working practices that need to change. I am sure that all noble Lords will have heard of some of them, and I suspect that some have thought, “Yeah, it does need to change”. The noble Baroness, Lady Smith, asked about job losses. Over the course of the Covid pandemic, any job losses that have happened to date have been voluntary. A very successful voluntary severance scheme was launched in October 2021. There were 5,000 applications for that scheme—I am sorry, would the noble Baroness like to intervene?

Viscount Younger of Leckie Portrait Viscount Younger of Leckie (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, we should let the Minister respond, as is the way that it should be on a Statement.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The noble Baroness was mumbling, and I was desperate to know what she had to say.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Davies of Brixton Portrait Lord Davies of Brixton (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I the interesting part of the Statement was, as someone said, its tone, which I think was accurately reflected in the Minister’s delivery to the House. There is clearly no intention from this Government to achieve a settlement. They have convinced themselves that it is in their interest to wind up the issue, reflected in the ministerial Statement in the use of terms such as “union barons”. This strike was because of the frustration among the membership of the unions involved; a massive majority of the entire unionised workforce was in favour of taking action. This is not down to the leadership; it is down to the members and their dissatisfaction. When the Minister comes and reads us a Statement that is more like a Daily Mail op-ed on a bad day, it demonstrates the Government’s total lack of interest in achieving any settlement.

Viscount Younger of Leckie Portrait Viscount Younger of Leckie (Con)
- Hansard - -

Sorry to interrupt the House again, but I urge Peers to keep their questions succinct to allow more Back-Bench questions to be asked.

Lord Davies of Brixton Portrait Lord Davies of Brixton (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Does the Minister understand that part of the reason for this discontent is the Government’s intention to wind back on the pension schemes that cover the railway staff? The Government make policies to make people’s pensions worse; that is part of the problem. Does she understand that?