Live Debate: Commons Chamber

Urgent question: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the latest publication from Operation Kenova and the Government’s response to its findings?

12:46

Rt Hon Gavin Robinson MP (Belfast East, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I am grateful for you granting this urgent question to ask the urgent question to ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the latest publication from Operation Kenova and the government's response to its findings yesterday.

12:46

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

I'm grateful to the right hon. >> I'm grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his question, and I want to inform the House that I will be laying a written ministerial statement on this ministerial statement on this matter later today. Operation Cordova has published its final report, which covers the activities of the alleged agent, Stakeknife, as well as other investigations referred to it by the PSNI. I want to begin by commending the Kenova team, led by Sir Ian Livingstone and John Boucher, for the exemplary way they carried out their work, built trust with families, put victims first and provided many answers about what happened to their loved ones.

Operation terma, which was part of Kenova, resulted in the prosecution of an individual, now extradited from Ireland and awaiting trial for the murder of three RUC officers in 1982. Cordova has set a standard for future legacy investigations, and we've drawn on a number of those lessons in drafting the troubles bill. I wish to express my heartfelt condolences to all the families who lost loved ones in the appalling circumstances described in this sobering report. Operation Cordova was asked to establish whether there was evidence of criminal offences by the alleged agent, known as stakeknife, or their alleged handlers.

The behaviour described of the alleged agent and their role in the provisional IRA is deeply disturbing. It should not have happened, and in recent decades there have been significant reforms to agent handling practice, including through legislation. The use of agents is nowadays subject to strict regulation, overseen by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner and the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. On Operation Canova's request to the government to name Stakeknife, I told Sir Ian Livingston in August that and I quote, due to ongoing litigation relevant to the neither confirm nor deny policy, namely the Thompson Supreme Court appeal, a substantive and final response to your request will be provided after judgement has issued in that case.

The government's first duty is, of course, to protect national security, and identifying agents risks jeopardising this. Today's report also makes public the high level findings of Operation Denton, which looked at killings carried out by the UVF Glenanne gang. The behaviour reported on including collusion by individual members of the security forces, is shocking. The government will respond to the full Denton report when it is published, bearing in mind that there are related legal proceedings ongoing in this case and in the case of Stakeknife.

The government responded to a number of the other recommendations in the interim report in August. This is available in the library and is also addressed in the written ministerial statement.

12:49

Rt Hon Gavin Robinson MP (Belfast East, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

Mr. speaker, can I thank the Secretary of State for that response and for being here this morning, this afternoon to discuss Operation Kenova? I know that when the Secretary of State was appointed, he has spent an inordinate amount of time on legacy. And I know that he is committed to the principles of not rewriting the past and of ensuring that issues can be explored to the fullest degree. He knows that in Northern Ireland, peace was only secured because of the actions of our intelligence services, our armed forces and brave members of the RUC.

He knows that the IRA were brought to their knees by the activities of our intelligence services, and he also knows that the IRA were riven by agents of the state. Both Denis Donaldson, the director of operations for Sinn Fein, and Freddie Scappaticci, the head of the Internal Investigations Unit, also known as Stakeknife. Can I ask the Secretary of State does he welcome the finding of Operation Kenova that there was no high level state collusion between paramilitaries, loyalist paramilitaries and members of the army or the security forces? Does he recognise the important role that our intelligence services did play in securing peace in Northern Ireland? Does he recognise that the IRA were riven by informers? Does he realise the absurdity of maintaining the position that operation can over? Could not name Freddie Scappaticci as Stakeknife? Does he recognise in the findings relating to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, that the UK state authorities had no information or intelligence that could have prevented those bombings? And does he recognise, in the context of the debate we are having on legacy, that there are too many inquiries he is letting pass by without highlighting the lack of accountability on the Dublin government, on the Republic of Ireland and their role in supporting the IRA, and we cannot wait until the conclusion of his legislative process or inquiry after inquiry, until they open their books, share their stories and indicate in the basis of truth and justice, the role they played in our troubled past.

12:52

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

To the right hon. Gentleman for >> To the right hon. Gentleman for those points, and I join him in recognising the huge contribution recognising the huge contribution that was made by the intelligence services and by the Army, and by the AUC and other security forces during the troubles, to try and keep people safe and to defeat those who were trying to destroy society as a result of their terrorism. And we all recognise that. And the responsibility for the killing of around 1700 people, the murder, often in the most brutal circumstances and in some cases killing people, burying them, and then for a long time providing no information as to where the remains of people's loved ones were to be found, rests with the provisional IRA, and I echo the comments that were made in the interim report and in the final report about what they did.

I note, of course, what the report has to say in not finding any evidence of high level collusion between the security forces and loyalist paramilitaries, in particular the UVF, in respect of the work of the Glenanne gang as they have been called. But I do notice what they said about individual collusion. And I used the word shocking deliberately, because to learn now that serving police officers so operation can over reports and serving members of the armed forces were colluding with those who were murdering people, a very large number of people, over 120 people were murdered by that gang.

On the final point that he raises about all of us. Wishing to learn from the past, and I think in order to learn from the past, one has to try and tell the truth about the past. I. I would simply draw his attention to the framework agreement reached between the UK government and the Irish government in September. The steps that have been taken, which he and I have debated many times before by the Irish Government to co-operate with the Omagh Inquiry and the commitment that they have given to the fullest possible co-operation with a Reformed Legacy Commission, which the Government's Troubles Bill is seeking to put in place with the consent and will of the House, and I hope that all members would welcome that, because the more information we can get about what happened, the more families will be able to find out exactly what took place in respect of their loved ones.

Antoniazzi.

12:55

Tonia Antoniazzi MP (Gower, Labour)

- -

Thank. committee's report on legacy outlined last week, information disclosure has been and remains one of the biggest challenges with legacy investigations. The Kenova report outlines the failure of MI5 to disclose all relevant material pertaining to Stakeknife in a timely manner. The PSNI Chief Constable said today he remains concerned that continues to be an unhelpful, unnecessary and protectionist approach to the disclosure of official records. Given these comments, Mr. Speaker, and the significant concerns outlined in our report on the government's new approach to disclosure, how can families have confidence in the new process?

12:56

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, I'm very grateful to the chair of the select committee for for what she has just said. She refers to the unfortunate episode in which MI5 discovered further files relating to the work of Operation Kenova, which they hadn't been able to identify previously. The Kenova report does say that they have no reason to believe that those reports, those files, were withheld. It was MI5 was not able to find them, and the head of MI5 set up a process to review exactly what had occurred.

I think it is essential that all of us are able to say that when the bodies that are charged with investigating what happened in the past, and that includes the current Icrar, which will become the Legacy Commission under our legislation, it is the case under the current Legacy Act that the Icrar has the ability to request and to see all information, all information, and that will remain the case when it comes to the reformed Legacy Commission, because the Commission has the ability to deal with closed material, the coronial system does not, as the House is aware, and it is vital, precisely as she puts it, for the confidence of families, that they know that the people who are trying to find out what happened to their loved ones are material.

12:57

Alex Burghart MP (Brentwood and Ongar, Conservative)

- -

Shadow Secretary of State. >> Shadow Secretary of State. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for granting this urgent question. And I congratulate my question. And I congratulate my hon. Friend from Belfast East for for asking it and for his excellent contribution just now. This is a very significant and highly detailed report, which I know hon. Members will want to take some time to digest. But we know this side of the House. Would like to thank all those who've contributed to it, and also to remember all of those who suffered during that very, very difficult time.

The last conservative government apologised for collusion following the silver review into the murder of Patrick Finucane. And whilst it is sobering to read further accounts of collusion between a small number of agents of the British state and paramilitaries, it is important to set this alongside a number of findings in the report today. First is the understanding, as mentioned by the Secretary of State, that legislation has changed dramatically since the time in question under the last Labour government, but also under the last conservative government.

Second, it's important to highlight that although the review found that there were a small number of rogue actors, the they did not find, and I quote, any evidence that collusion occurred at a political, political or strategic level, and that there was no evidence which indicates that the RUC, at an organisational level, was involved or complicit with the activities of extremists or terrorists. I think it's very important that those findings are not lost. Third, as my hon. Friend from Belfast East said the the review found that of the the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings, there was no specific intelligence which, if acted upon, could have prevented those bombings and it did not manage to find any evidence that that there was intelligence that would indicate that British security forces were colluding with the UVF in those attacks.

Again, historic findings. I think today I'd be very interested to hear from the Secretary of State if he would be prepared to come back at a later date and tell us more about the government's future position on neither confirm nor deny. I understand that there's a case going on at the moment, but I believe that once that's done, it would be very important for for the government to be clear with the House about how it sees that policy going forward. And lastly, Mr.

Speaker, as has already been raised, there have been a number of reviews, detailed reviews and necessary reviews into collusion between agents of the British state and paramilitaries. But as yet, no such reviews on the Irish side. Will the Secretary of State tell us whether the Irish government has told him, by when they intend to present their own legislation?

13:00

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Thank you. >> Well, I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his comments and the spirit and tone in which he spirit and tone in which he delivers them on this extremely serious matter. I do indeed acknowledge, as I think I've already indicated, what he said about the nature of the collusion that has been discovered, what it was and what it was not, including in relation to the Dublin Monaghan bombings. Those are very, very important findings.

It is for the Irish government to determine what information they reveal, but they have given commitments to me and to the UK government and indeed to all of us, about the cooperation that they will provide. The tourniquet has said to me that by March, the legislation to allow witness testimony to be given to the Omagh bombing inquiry will be in place and we look forward to seeing in due course the outline of the Irish government legislation that will implement the rest of the commitments when it comes to cooperation with the New Legacy Commission, which we are seeking to establish by means of the legislation currently before the House.

I am always happy to return to the House, to provide further information and to answer further questions. But we are waiting for the Thomson judgement, which is absolutely about the neither confirm nor deny policy. Which is why, when I wrote to Sir Ian Livingstone on the I think it was the 13th of August, I said to him what I quoted in my original answer to the right hon. Gentleman's question.

13:02

Colum Eastwood MP (Foyle, Social Democratic & Labour Party)

- -

Matt Bishop. firstly say that the people responsible for the murder of an innocent people in Northern Ireland over many decades were the people who carried out those murders and the organisations that they were members of. But it is also very clear, Mr. Speaker, through these reports and previous investigations, that elements within the British state worked hand in glove with loyalist paramilitaries as they murdered scores and hundreds of innocent people in the north of Ireland, and also that the IRA were riddled with informers and including clearly at the very highest levels.

So now that we know all of that, Mr. Speaker, has the Secretary of State made an assessment of how many lives could have been saved and how much earlier could we have had peace in Ireland if the British government had acted properly?

13:03

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, I would say to my hon. Friend, I have not made such an assessment. Now, Operation Nova itself had something to say about in relation to the activities of the alleged agent, Stakeknife. Their view was that the balance. I hate to use the word the balance sheet. Lives lost and lives saved was not quite as had been described by others. What I think is particularly important about the report today, and it confirms a point that John Boucher made.

Mr. speaker, when he published the interim report, because he said that in the absence of information about what happened, people form a view about what they think happened. And as a result, what is finally produced. And there is an example of that in relation to the final operation Kenova report, it might turn out that it's not quite what everybody thought it was, and that is the argument for trying to be as open as possible about what happened. But I wanted to be clear in coming to the House today that what is revealed, as I've said, is disturbing and deeply shocking and should not have happened.

And it's lessons. spokesperson.

13:04

Mr Paul Kohler MP (Wimbledon, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the hon. Member for Belfast East for his question and the Secretary of State his answer. I have three questions. Does the government accept the operation? Can over report findings of serious organisational failure by MI5, and if so, what concrete steps will it take to address these failures? Secondly, is the Secretary of State satisfied his proposed legacy legislation contains adequate safeguards to ensure that honourable former service personnel who served lawfully and with integrity, and followed orders in good faith, do not fear persecution on the basis of the basis of the unlawful actions by the rogue individuals or the state.

And thirdly, does the Secretary of State agree that the neither confirm nor deny policy must be exercised in a proportionate and necessary manner? Should not be used to protect agents who commit gross serious crime, nor hide any serious misdeeds of the state. Thank you.

13:05

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, I'm grateful to the hon. >> Well, I'm grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. I would say, on the subject of our say, on the subject of our legislation and safeguards, it contains a number of very specific safeguards that are in the Bill because of our commitment to the veterans who served with such bravery in the most difficult circumstances. But I've also indicated to the House that as the bill progresses, I am open to a continuing conversation with members on all sides of the chamber and with the Royal British Legion and the other organisations representing veterans.

So we get this right. I would say about the neither confirm nor deny policy that it is really important for our national security, because the ultimate responsibility of governments is to protect national security. And the moment that they neither confirm nor deny policy starts to be eroded. Although there have been a small number of cases in which it has been set aside for particular reasons, the moment that happens, it undermines the confidence of those who are serving the state today to keep us safe, because they may start to ask themselves, is that lifelong commitment not to reveal anything about what I've done? Is the government still going to uphold them? So it's it's a really, really important protection for those who do very dangerous things in order to try and protect all of us.

And finally, in relation to MI5, I responded in answer to the chair of the Select committee about the information that was subsequently discovered. But of course, the use of agents, covert human intelligence sources is nowadays subject to regulation under the Regulatory of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and the Criminal Conduct Act 2021. Both of those bits of legislation show the determination of the House to learn from what has gone wrong in the past.

13:07

Mike Kane MP (Wythenshawe and Sale East, Labour)

- -

Mike Kane. that this was a brutal, murderous conflict, but as we are reminded today, it was internecine as well at times. There will be days like this in the phrase of one of Northern Ireland's famous sons. Will the Secretary of State agree with me that even on days like this, we should continue to keep victims and families at the forefront of our thoughts? I agree.

13:08

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

With my hon. Friend very, very >> With my hon. Friend very, very strongly in what he has just said, strongly in what he has just said, and in one sense, the the great contribution that Operation Kenova has made to doing precisely that has been the way it has dealt with the families, kept in touch with the families, told them what they were able to discover, what they weren't able to discover, and they had their victims and Survivors advisory group.

And we have taken that idea because all the people I spoke to said, that really worked well in Kenova, and we have put it into the bill that the House is currently considering, because learning the lessons is not just reflecting on the horror that this report reveals, but also learning from the way they went about dealing with families, because it's really important that the commission I know they're working hard to do that at the moment, is able to win the confidence of families.

So when they do tell them, I can tell you this and I can't tell haven't been able to find out. The following families will have confidence they've done their darndest to what really went on.

13:09

Rt Hon Sir Julian Lewis MP (New Forest East, Conservative)

- -

Sir Julian. >> I'm sure the Secretary of State. >> Will agree that running any double agent inside a murderous double agent inside a murderous organisation is bound to be a moral nightmare. The justification for such action is always as it should be, that many more lives will be saved as a result of doing this, even if the agent is implicating in illegal and indeed murderous activities. What's unusual about this case is that it appears to be that more lives were not saved by this particular operation.

Can the Secretary of State say whether the agency's accept that this particular operation was counterproductive, even in its own terms? And if he can't share that with us openly, could it at least be shared confidentially with the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament?

13:10

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, the Intelligence and Security Committee may well wish to Security Committee may well wish to look at the operation at Canova report and to ask questions. And in the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's contribution, he put an important hypothetical point about the difficulty of balancing these considerations. But there is no doubt that the contribution that agents make are very important to protecting our national security. And as a number of members have already indicated to the House, were very, very important in the fight against those who are trying to destroy society in Northern Ireland and were responsible for killing so many people during the course of the troubles.

13:11

Katrina Murray MP (Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch, Labour)

- -

Katrina Murray thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I commend my right hon. Friend for Belfast East for securing this urgent question. I we have already talked about the experiences of the Kenova families in being able in having the confidence in this process and recognise the complexity of what the situation has been the of the 28 years of the troubles. And you've already highlighted yourself that the the statement of the lack of transparency and the lack of answers leaves a place where avoid that worst fears.

Phil, on behalf of relatives, that makes the section of the the troubles troubles bill that is currently going under going through legislative process. Even more important on the grounds of disclosure. Can I ask the Secretary of State, just how will we make sure that the the best experiences of, of Operation Kenova are built into are built into the next stages of the legislation?

13:12

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, I thank my hon. Friend for her question. In a number of respects, the the advisory respects, the the advisory committee representing victims and survivors, the fact there will be a new oversight board. The changes that the bill is making to the provisions relating to disclosure. But she makes such a powerful point when she says that the the lack of answers creates a void. And this is a void that the families have had to live with for many, many, many years.

And that is why the whole House has an obligation to do everything that we can to create a system that all families can have confidence in, so that all cases can be looked at by it.

13:12

Jim Allister KC MP (North Antrim, Traditional Unionist Voice)

- -

Jim Allister. >> Mr. speaker. >> On a day like today, I think it's important to remind ourselves that our security and intelligence forces saved hundreds of lives in the face of murderous terrorism terrorists. Of course, you kept no records to be poured over years later with the Secretary of State agree that first and foremost was a ruthless IRA murderer. Would he agree that the RUC in the UDR, whatever the Red, the renegade actions of a very tiny number of members, some of whom have rightly faced justice for it, that they were organisations of immense integrity, who service and bravery preserved many lives.

And does he agree that the Denton report finally laid to rest the Republican myth that the security forces were implicated in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings?

13:14

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, on the latter point that the hon. Gentleman raises, that is the hon. Gentleman raises, that is indeed what the Kenova report says today. It's one of many reasons why it is so important. I am not going to comment on the alleged agent with the name Stakeknife for the reasons that I gave out in answering the right hon. Gentleman's question at the beginning. Because this Thompson judgement that we are currently awaiting is really important in respect of neither confirm or deny.

I've already indicated to the House that I join all Honourable and right hon. Members in paying tribute to the work of the intelligence services and the security forces in trying to keep people safe in the face of murder and mayhem caused by many people. During the course of the troubles, both the Republican movement, but also the loyalist gangs that killed a lot of people also.

13:14

Adam Jogee MP (Newcastle-under-Lyme, Labour)

- -

Adam Jogee. >> Adam Jogee. >> Thank you very much. Can I thank the right hon. Gentleman from East Belfast for his urgent question, Belfast for his urgent question, and like him and others across the House, I think about the victims of terrorism who lost their lives and their families today. I want to acknowledge and commend Sir Ian Livingstone and Chief Constable Berkshire for their work. I think this is a demonstration of how important independence is. Now, the reports Mr Speaker for families that Operation Kenova has produced demonstrates the value of independent and effective legacy investigations.

So with that in mind, and I acknowledge the Secretary of State's reference to his openness, can I urge him to think about appointments to the new judicial panel of the New Legacy Commission? I believe that they should be made by the Judicial Appointments Commission in Northern Ireland, rather than the Secretary of State, because as operation, any Secretary of State, I should say, because operation can over demonstrates that independence is key. If we're going to effectively address the legacy of the past.

13:15

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, independence is indeed extremely important to building a sense of confidence on the part of families that their cases will be properly looked into. I note the point that my hon. Friend makes about the appointment of judicial panel members for the Commission, in particular the inquisitorial proceedings. I suspect that we may return to that in committee.

13:16

Carla Lockhart MP (Upper Bann, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

Carla Lockhart. State needs to go further. A number of members have pressed him on this point, but he still has not explicitly told this House that given the extensive scrutiny directed at alleged agents within the UK establishment, what demands he has made of the Irish government to disclose the extent and details of agents operating within the republican movement, particularly in light of the irrefutable evidence of collusion that enabled the murder of RUC officers, UDR and Protestant civilians, particularly in the border areas, because, unlike him, I'm not prepared to accept their say so when it when for decades they have covered up, housed and protected terrorists and denied innocent victims truth and justice.

13:17

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Say to the hon. Member, in the light of what she has just said, I hope that she would welcome the commitments that the Irish government has given. Well, she shakes her head, but she is is she is saying, well, the past, the past and what happened in Ireland or didn't happen in Ireland is a matter for the Irish state to deal with. But I hope she would welcome the commitments that have been given to co-operate to the fullest possible extent in the New Legacy Commission, which is not the case in relation to the current commission established by the Legacy Act, for reasons that she and the whole House will be well aware of.

Because whatever happened in the past, the most, the most important thing is that we enable families who are still waiting for answers to get access to all information that is available now. That is what the Irish government has committed to.

13:18

Chris Coghlan MP (Dorking and Horley, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Mr. speaker, on. victims, but I think the the wider context of our security services is very important. I worked in the Foreign Office in counter-terrorism on the anti-ISIS campaign. The Secretary of State speaks about strict regulation today. That resonates. He speaks about neither confirm nor deny. I entirely agree with his points. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the the ethics around agent handling protection and recruitment are incredibly complex and it is all too easy to criticise our security services, who in my experience, do frankly an outstanding, at times lives.

13:18

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, I do agree with the the hon. Member the from the contact that I have had with the security services since I took up this post, the commitment, the dedication, the passion, the ingenuity, the determination to protect people today is quite something to behold. And some judgements are complex. There's no doubt about that. But it's also important that we learn from the past and what didn't go right. And I think anyone looking at the final Kenova report today and seeing what it reveals about what went on in some cases will recognise a the importance of learning from that past.

And that is why the legislation, which governments have passed since have been so important, because that legislation recognises the complexity but reached the conclusion. You have to have a legal framework that governs it with independent oversight. We now have that. That was not the case in the 1970s and the 1980s.

13:20

Robin Swann MP (South Antrim, Ulster Unionist Party)

- -

Robin Swann. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. In the press conference this morning, the Chief Constable said the investigation has demonstrated the investigation has demonstrated that murders that could and should have been prevented, that were allowed to take place. Mr. speaker, there was always an alternative to murder in Northern Ireland. So would the Secretary of State agree with me that it's now time for an inquiry, actually, to identify and to hold to account those who directed terrorism and murder in Northern Ireland?

13:20

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Yes. >> Yes. >> Well, I would say to the hon. Gentleman that we have the commission that was established by commission that was established by the last government in the Legacy Act, which has the capacity to investigate all all cases that are referred to it. And when I came into office, I took the decision that we would retain but reform the Commission as opposed to abolishing it and starting again, as I was urged by some people to do in Northern Ireland.

I think it was the right decision to take, not least because there are, what, 100 investigations that are currently taking place. But what we have to ensure is that it is established and reformed in a way that gives all families confidence. And I would say that what we're trying to achieve is one mechanism for dealing with finding answers to those questions. I've said to the House a number of times before, Mr. Speaker, we're not going to be able to deal with legacy by a series of public inquiry after public inquiry.

We need to fight. We need to establish the commission on the basis that it can do the job for everyone.

13:21

Rt Hon Sammy Wilson MP (East Antrim, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

Sammy Wilson Mr. speaker, the >> Sammy Wilson Mr. speaker, the report makes it quite clear the extent of IRA brutality and murder in Northern Ireland, including murders within their own republican community. The Secretary of State agree with me that the First Minister of Northern Ireland can no longer remain ambiguous in, first of all, her acknowledgement and secondly, her apology for what her fellow travellers did to people within their own community and within the wider community in Northern Ireland.

And would he also accept that the real state collusion occurred by the successive governments in the Irish Republic who hid terrorists, allowed them to store arms, train crossed the border and then refused to extradite them, and instead of giving them a role in the arrangements for the the legacy of the past. Will he commit to holding the Irish government to account for its sins of the past?

13:22

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Well, I can say to the hon. Gentleman, I certainly intend to Gentleman, I certainly intend to hold the Irish government to account for the commitments it gave in the framework that I announced jointly with the tallest in September. Of course, there was always an alternative to what went on. Always. And Northern Ireland eventually got there through the Good Friday Agreement and the peace that has been revealed and sustained since 1998. It is for each individual to decide how they deal with that.

But I would say to the hon. Gentleman that what we need to focus on now, because things clearly that can't be undone in the past, is to learn from what we have learnt. And today's report is an extremely important contribution to that about what went on in all sorts of respects. But to make sure, as I've said a number of times, that families get those answers they're still waiting for. Canova did a lot to do that for the families with whom they work, but there's lots and lots of other families who still don't know.

That's why we have to have a commission that works for everyone.

13:24

Sarah Pochin MP (Runcorn and Helsby, Reform UK)

- -

Sarah Pochin. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This report covers the activities of. >> One informer. >> From within the higher echelons

**** Possible New Speaker ****

From within the higher echelons of the provisional IRA. But does the Secretary of State agree with me that there is a risk that the me that there is a risk that the findings of this report, when taken in isolation, do fail to fully recognise the contribution made by informants and agents inside the IRA to stop the killings of countless lives.

13:24

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Yeah, well, I think it's very important that we take a balanced important that we take a balanced view, that we acknowledge successes and bravery and determination, and we saw that in abundance during the course of the troubles. But where things happened that should not have happened, we need to acknowledge them, because how can you make progress now and into the future if you don't learn the lessons of the past?

13:25

Mr Gregory Campbell MP (East Londonderry, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

Mr Speaker as people analyse the report and the second statement, report and the second statement, they will be looking to the future as we try and ensure no one rewrites the past. But in trying to do that with the certainty of state, agree that the murky world that people like Scappaticci inhabited brought about the consequences of 1994, when both the IRA and loyalists declared ceasefires, and that now is the time for the leaders of the political republican movement to say what happened in the past was wrong, shouldn't have happened, and issue an unequivocal apology for the actions of the provisional IRA.

13:25

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Well, I would simply say to the hon. Gentleman, he raises a very hon. Gentleman, he raises a very important point that we are clear as a house. There was always, always an alternative to violence. It was not justified. It was never justified. And the when you look at the number of people who were killed on all sides in the troubles, the grief, the pain, the suffering that was caused. But we also need to recognise that there was a process that led to those ceasefires, to political power sharing, which has resulted in peace and stability in Northern Ireland ever since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement.

And that is the most important thing that we should hold on to. While, as I've said already, learning the lessons from the past and providing answers to those families who remain to find them, and I would just share with the house, because I think this is the final question. About three and a half, four weeks ago, I went to Bragan Bog and with the

13:27

Jim Shannon MP (Strangford, Democratic Unionist Party)

- -

brother and two brothers and sister of Columba McVeigh. He was 19 years of Columba McVeigh. He was 19 years of age when he was murdered by the provisional IRA, and the information suggests that his remains lie in that bog. It is a desolate place. There have been searching for his body for a very, searching for his body for a very, very long time, and the the commission for the Location of Victims remains has done such an Victims remains has done such an important job in helping to bring back the remains of people who were murdered in those circumstances, Mr.

Speaker, so they could be laid to rest with their families present. And I and I'm sure all members of the House long for the day when the bodies of Columba McVeigh and Robert Nairac and Seamus Maguire and Joe Lynskey are finally recovered. So all of the disappeared can rest where they should rest with the knowledge of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

their families so they can have some peace. Yeah. Final question. Jim Shannon always.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Jim Shannon always. A final, final question. Can I thank you very much for for his answers. And can I also thank all of the security forces, the Army, the RUC for all that they did to the RUC for all that they did to save lives? I think in this House, the nation, Northern Ireland owes them a great debt for all they've them a great debt for all they've done. And we put that on record. When thinking of Canova. My mind goes back to the 1984 and the case of Jemmy Young, who lived in Portaferry in my constituency of Strangford.

His case was part of the Fylde sent to the PPS for Northern Ireland. Included in this was the report of steak knives involvement, but no prosecution was ever initiated for the family who are still alive and mourning the killing of Jemmy. What steps will be taken to ensure that the family will have access to as much information as legally possible, to get them some form of justice for his murder? I always ask for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

justice. I'm asking for justice for Jemmy on this family. Yeah, yeah.

13:28

Rt Hon Hilary Benn MP, The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Leeds South, Labour)

- -

>> Yeah, yeah. >> Well, the the hon. Gentleman makes his. >> Please don't know. He's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

answering the gentleman. The hon. Gentleman always makes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The hon. Gentleman always makes his contribution in these matters with real force and compassion to with real force and compassion to find answers for families as he will be aware, operation Canova submitted a number of files to the Public Prosecution Service in Northern Ireland. In only one case, as a prosecution been taking forward, and I referred to that in my answer to the right hon. Gentleman's question. In other cases, the PPS decided there was not a basis for prosecution.

It is, of course, frustrating, but the independence of our prosecutorial system is an absolutely essential safeguard for all of us, all of us, because they have to make a judgement as to whether the two tests. Is there a reasonable prospect of a conviction? Is it in the public interest to prosecute are met? But that does not mean that the family that the hon. Gentleman is referred to can't still seek to get answers. And that is what the Commission is for. It's work.

It's doing, undertaking currently, it's work, it's undertaking currently, and we'll be doing in the future with the new arrangements that I hope the House will agree to put in place, because we should leave no stone unturned in trying to give families what they've been looking for for such a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

long time. And I wish that to the family that the hon. Member refers to. We'll now let the frontbenchers

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For For I For I call For I call the For I call the Home For I call the Home Secretary For I call the Home Secretary to make a statement. I remind hon. Members that they should not refer to any specific cases currently before the court, and that they should exercise caution with respect to any specific cases that might subsequently come before the court. In order not to prejudice court. In order not to prejudice these proceedings.

Home Secretary.

13:30

Ministerial statement: Safeguarding

Yeah, yeah. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, with your

13:31

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

permission, I will make a statement on the independent inquiry into grooming gangs, the appointment of grooming gangs, the appointment of its channel, a chair and panel and the inquiry's terms of reference. I the inquiry's terms of reference. I know that for many, this day is long overdue. For years, the victims of these awful crimes were victims of these awful crimes were ignored. First abused by vile predators, they then found themselves belittled and even themselves belittled and even blamed when it was justice they were owed.

In January, my predecessor asked Baroness Casey of Blackstock, who's here with us today, to conduct a national audit on group based child sexual exploitation and abuse with devastating clarity, Baroness Casey revealed the horror that lies behind that Jargonistic term. It is vital that we to call these crimes what they were multiple sexual assaults committed by multiple men on multiple occasions, children were submitted to beatings and gang rapes. Many contracted sexually transmitted infections. Some were forced to have abortions, others had their children taken from them.

But it was not just these awful crimes that now shame us. There was also an abject failure by the state in its many forms to fulfil its most basic duty protecting the young and vulnerable. Worse still, some in positions of power turned a blind eye to the horror, even covered it up despite a shameful lack of national data, Baroness Casey was clear that in some local areas where data was available and I quote, disproportionate numbers of men from Asian ethnic backgrounds were amongst the suspects.

Like every member of my community who I know, I am horrified by these acts. We must root out this evil once and for all. The sickening acts of a minority of evil men, as well as those in positions of authority who look the other way, must not be allowed to marginalise or demonise entire communities of law abiding citizens. What is required now is a moment of reckoning. We must cast fresh light on this darkness. In her audit, Baroness Casey called for a national inquiry.

In June, the government accepted that recommendation. And today I can announce the chair and panel that will form the leadership of the inquiry and a draft of the inquiry's terms of reference. The inquiry will be chaired by Baroness Anne Longfield. As many in this place will know, Baroness Longfield was the Children's Commissioner from 2015 to 2021. She has devoted her life to children's rights, including running a charity, supporting and protecting young people, and working for prime Ministers of different political parties.

In recognition of her service, Baroness Longfield was elevated to the Lords earlier this year. At that point she took the Labour whip which on taking up this appointment she will now resign. Alongside her, I can also announce her two fellow panellists. The first is Zoe Billingham CBE. Zoe is a former inspector at His Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and currently serves as chair of Norfolk and Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust. She brings deep expertise in safeguarding and policing, specifically in holding forces to account.

The second panellist is Eleanor Kelly CBE. Eleanor is the former chief executive of Southwark Council. In 2017, she supported the survivors of the London Bridge terrorist attacks and the victims of the Grenfell Tower fire of the same year. Together, the chair and panel bring deep experience of championing children's rights, knowledge of policing and local government and, crucially, a proven track record of holding powerful institutions to account. Each individual was recommended by Baroness Casey and her recommendation follows.

Recent engagement with victims. The first thing the chair and panel will do alongside Baroness Casey is meet with victims later this week. Today we also published the draft Terms of reference, which I will place in the library of the house. Baroness Casey was clear this inquiry must be time limited to ensure that justice is swift. For those who have already waited too long. For that reason, it will be completed within three years, supported by a £65 million Budget. The inquiry will be a series of local investigations, overseen by a national panel with full statutory powers.

Baroness Longfield has confirmed that Oldham will have a local investigation. The chair and panel will determine the other locations in due course, and no area will be able to resist a local investigation. These terms of reference are clear on a number of vital issues. The inquiry is focussed specifically on child sexual abuse committed by grooming gangs. It will consider explicitly the background of offenders, including their ethnicity and religion, and whether the authorities failed to properly investigate what happened out of a misplaced desire to protect community cohesion.

The inquiry will act without fear or favour. Identifying individual, institutional and systemic failure, inadequate organisational responses and failures of leadership. It will also work hand in hand with the police, where new criminality comes to light. Be that by the perpetrators or those who covered up their crimes. The inquiry will pass evidence to law enforcement so they can take forward any further prosecutions and put more of these evil men behind bars. The inquiry must and will place victims and survivors at the forefront, with a charter setting out how they will participate and how their views, experiences and testimony will shape the inquiry's work.

As I have said already, the terms are in draft form. The chair will now consult on them with victims and other stakeholders, and they will be confirmed no later than March, when the inquiry can begin its work in earnest. Alongside launching this inquiry, Baroness Casey's audit contained a number of other recommendations which the government accepted in full. As the inquiry begins its work, we continue writing these wrongs. I can announce today that I have commissioned new research from UK Research and Innovation to rectify the unacceptable gaps in our understanding of perpetrators backgrounds and motivations, including their ethnicity and religion.

My predecessor wrote to all police forces calling on them to improve the collection of ethnicity data. And while the Home Secretary does not currently have the power to mandate that this is collected, I will rectify this by legislating at the earliest possible opportunity. The Department for education is currently interrogating gaps in children in need. Data identified in the audit, which seems to under-report the scale of this crisis. My right hon. Friend, the Education Secretary will soon publish the findings of an urgent review of this data conducted by her department across government.

The audit identified that poor data, a poor data sharing continues to put children at risk. As a result, we are introducing a legal duty for information sharing between safeguarding partners. We are creating a unique identifier for each child, linking all data across government, and we are upgrading police technology to ensure data can be shared across agencies. The audit also identified an absurdity in our legal system that saw some child rapists convicted of lesser crimes. As a result, we are now changing the law to make clear that children cannot consent when they have been raped by an adult, and so perpetrators are charged for the hideous crime they have in fact committed.

While the law has protected abusers from the consequences of their crimes, it has too often punished victims. Some survivors were convicted for crimes they had been coerced into continuing their trauma. To this day, we are already legislating in the Crime and Policing Bill to disregard offences related to prostitution, and the Minister of Justice is now working with the Criminal Cases Review Commission to ensure that they are resourced to review applications from individuals who believe that they were wrongly criminalised.

The National Audit identified further weaknesses in relation to taxi licensing. Abusers were applying for licences in areas where controls were lax to circumvent protection put in place by local councils to tackle abuse. My right hon. Friend the Transport Secretary will soon be legislating to close this dangerous loophole in the regulation of taxis. The audit was clear that justice has not been done. Baroness Casey requested that a new National Police investigation was required to bring offenders to justice. Last month, the National Crime Agency launched Operation Beacon Port, reviewing previously closed cases of child sexual exploitation.

It has already flagged more than 1200 cases for potential reinvestigation, more than 200 of which are high priority cases of rape. The evil men who committed these crimes and thought they got away with it, will find they have nowhere to hide. The audit finally called on the government to fund the delivery of its recommendations, alongside investment in the inquiry itself. I can announce today that a further £3.65 million will be committed this year to the policing operation, survivor support and research into grooming gangs.

This work, Madam Deputy Speaker, is essential, but without truth there can be no justice. Today I have announced the chair and panel of an inquiry which will shine a bright light on this dark moment in our history. They will do so alongside the victims of these awful crimes, who have waited too long to see justice done. This inquiry is theirs, not ours. So I call on all those present to put politics aside for a moment, and to support this chair and her panel in the Pursuit of truth and justice.

And I commend this statement to the House.

13:42

Rt Hon Chris Philp MP (Croydon South, Conservative)

- -

Shadow Home Secretary. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Let us remember, victims are at the heart of this young girls, some only ten years old, were groomed and gang raped by men of mainly Pakistani origin girls like Jane, just 12 years old, when she was raped by an illegal immigrant. When she was found by police. Instead of arresting the rapist, they arrested Jane or Anna, only 15 years old, who repeatedly told social workers that she had been gang raped.

But instead of helping her, they allowed her to marry her main abuser in an Islamic ceremony attended by the very social worker who should have protected her. Last week, sentencing remarks were published from several of these terrible cases. I warn the House some of these are extremely graphic. One perpetrator, Mohammed Karar, raped a 12 year old girl and when she tried to fight back, he hit her with a baseball bat and then inserted the handle into her vagina.

He also injected her with heroin and forced her to take crack cocaine. Another man, Arshid Hussain, viciously beat a young girl, stubbed out a cigarette on her chest, tied her up, and she was then repeatedly raped by numerous different Asian men. The same man, Arshid Hussain, also called a victim who had been raped and abused since the age of just seven. Quotes. White trash. He said that Asian girls would not do what he was forcing her to do. There was an explicit racial element to his crime.

He was raping his victim because she was white. The identity of the majority of the perpetrators is something that should not be hidden. A 2020 study by academics at the Universities of Southampton and Reading reviewed 498 grooming gang convictions. They found that 83% of the perpetrators were of Muslim background, mainly specifically of Pakistani heritage. The Casey Report and the Telford report made similar observations. The fact is, these crimes were deliberately covered up by those in authority who were more interested in so-called community relations and in avoiding being called racist than they were in protecting young girls.

I spoke to a retired police officer who was told by a serving chief superintendent to stop investigating abuse by Pakistani origin taxi drivers in Bradford, because the local police did not want to offend Bradford's Muslim community. And I have sent the name of that officer to the police for investigation. A former Labour MP, Simon Danczuk, was even told by the then chair of the Parliamentary Labour Party to stop asking questions to avoid antagonising the Muslim community in his town.

Yet when the need for a national inquiry into this was raised in January, the Prime Minister disgracefully smeared those calling for an inquiry as quotes far right what the Prime Minister claimed was a far right bandwagon in January had become government policy by June. So will the Home Secretary please apologise on behalf of the Prime Minister for what he said last January? The truth is this should not have taken several months and the threat of a vote in Parliament to agree to this inquiry in the first place, and it should not have taken another six months to appoint a chair.

That is what the survivors and their families told me yesterday. One of the most disturbing elements of this scandal is the deliberate cover up of these crimes. As I have said, so can the Home Secretary assure the House that those in authority who covered up these crimes will be prosecuted for the offence of misconduct in public office? And will she ensure the inquiry refers such cases to the police for investigation? Can she confirm the inquiry will formally start in March of 2026, and that the final report will be published publicly three years later in March 2029? We have not yet seen the terms of reference.

Survivors and their families who I met yesterday are concerned the scope of this inquiry may be too broad. So will the Home Secretary confirm it will focus specifically on localised group based grooming gangs and it will analyse the report, the ethnicity and religious background of the perpetrators. She mentions local inquiries sitting underneath the national inquiry, and she also specifically confirm that those local inquiries will be completely independent of those bodies they are investigating, particularly independent of local councils and independent of local police forces.

They can't be allowed to investigate themselves. Will the Home Secretary also confirm that parents of survivors and victims will be able to serve on the panel as well? I spoke yesterday to two parents of survivors who felt they had been excluded from the previous panels. Madam Deputy Speaker, for many survivors and victims, the truth has been hidden for far too long. These crimes were covered up because those in authority were more concerned about so-called community relations and avoiding being called racist than they were about protecting young children.

That was an abject moral failure. The truth at last must come out.

13:47

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Madam Secretary.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, can I thank the Shadow Secretary of State for his remarks? Let me just State for his remarks? Let me just say, as he was reading out excerpts from some of the court transcripts that have been made public, I, like that have been made public, I, like other members in the House, have have read some of those transcripts, and they do make for truly and they do make for truly horrifying reading. And they are a reminder, the starkest reminder of all, perhaps for everyone in this all, perhaps for everyone in this House.

And beyond that, it is absolutely essential that we all collectively do right by the victims who have had such unimaginable horrors inflicted upon them. And I hope that that is the spirit in which we will all be able to engage across this House. As the inquiry gets up and running and continues its work. I also want to say, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think this is a moment to elevate now that we have a chair and panel in place to elevate this discussion beyond our usual trade offs of party politics across this Dispatch Box, the shadow Secretary of State has a critique of the government I will robustly defend the government of which I am a part.

We have always been focussed on the outcome of justice and truth for victims, less so the process itself. But it was this government that asked Baroness Casey to do her national audit. She followed the evidence and recommended this national inquiry. And that is what we are doing and that is what we have supported. But now that we have a chair and a panel, I just think that this is a moment if we're going to do right by the victims, who are a diverse cohort of people who will have different views and who will all feel, regardless of where they stand on this inquiry itself, some degree of anxiety about what will happen next, and will need some reassurance that we can rise above our usual political discourse and unite in support for the Chair and panel as they do this important work.

Let me, let me say for most of his detailed questions, the answer is a straightforward yes. So on scope, let me just reassure him. There is no dilution of the scope, and it is very clearly focussed on exactly the problem that was named by Baroness Casey in her national audit, to the extent that the inquiry finds evidence of any potential misconduct in public office or other breaches of the law, of course they are working very closely with our partners in law enforcement.

The whole point for having this inquiry is to make sure that there are actions that result from these investigations and that people are properly held to account, including by facing the full force of the law. I'm sure that once the inquiry reports, they will have other things to say, potentially even about strengthening the law as well. So I think it's important we let the inquiry do their work, but they are not going to be held back from making any findings that lead to further investigations and accountability through the legal system.

Let me also confirm to him on timings. March. The draft terms of reference will be confirmed no later than March. It could come a little earlier, potentially, but up to three three months for the draft terms of reference and then up to three years for the inquiry to conclude so no later than 2020, not March 29th, with the report as well. And that is the timetable that the chair and the panel members have signed up for on the local investigations. Of course, it's right they won't be investigating themselves.

The work of the local investigation will be under the auspices of the chair and her panel, and they will be making sure that those investigations are held by them to the standard that they will set and follow themselves, and they will also decide which other areas they wish to be included in these local investigations. And I'm sure members will want to make representations to them. But no area anywhere in England or Wales will be able to resist having a local investigation under the auspices of this inquiry, which of course, has all of the statutory powers that you would expect such an inquiry to have.

I think, Madam Deputy Speaker, I've dealt with all of the issues that the shadow Secretary of State has raised, but I do look forward to, I hope, more constructive dialogue between us as the inquiry gets underway.

13:52

Sarah Champion MP (Rotherham, Labour)

- -

Again. >> Again. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Madam Deputy Speaker, as you know, I've spent 13 years researching this most evil of crimes, so I this most evil of crimes, so I don't know how or where to start, but let me boil it down to a couple of things. One, I still have no idea. While those paid to protect children didn't do that. And so I hope the inquiry both finds that out and makes sure there is no way that happens again.

Two I believe the scale of this is in literally every town, every city, every village in the United Kingdom. And so I hope the inquiry and the NCA work is able to cover all of that. But then that brings me to my substantive, which is this is going to cost a lot of money. Every case you find will need to be an investigation, but equally, local authorities will have to put child protection measures in place in Rotherham. All of that money has come from the local authority.

So can the Home Secretary assure us that our local authorities will have child protection money, and our police forces will have the resources they need to get the prosecutions we have to see?

13:53

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Exactly.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend and I paid tribute to her long work, exposing many of the issues herself in her own area that will now be the subject of the national inquiry. She's right. It is utterly shocking and defies comprehension that people whose only job was to look people whose only job was to look after vulnerable children failed in their duty to those children, and the inquiry will ensure that they face ultimate accountability for their failures.

I hear the point about the inquiry covering every every single area. There is no doubt that child abuse occurs in every part of the country. One of the recommendations that Baroness Casey made was that the inquiry should be time limited, because so many of the victims and survivors have waited so long for a proper measure of justice in their in their cases. And she recognised that there is therefore a necessary trade off between doing something that is time limited and being able to go to every single area.

But I'm sure the inquiry, the chair and the panel will engage constructively with members across this House to make sure they get to the right areas and can draw the lessons that will then lead to national recommendations. So even if the lessons come from a smaller cohort of areas, all of the recommendations will apply absolutely everywhere. And the government has already invested billions in child protection measures already in this parliament. But I recognise the court has made and I'm sure that when the recommendations are made, the government will respond on money in due course.

13:54

Max Wilkinson MP (Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Liberal Democrat spokesperson Max Wilkinson. about are despicable and sickening. They were first reported in the press more than 20 years ago. The victims have already waited far too long for justice. So we welcome today's announcement and we welcome other details in the statement, including reforms to ensure children cannot be considered to have consented to sexual activity with adults. The fact that that was the case is a shame on our nation, and we welcome moves to close loopholes in taxi licensing and the points made about data collection, too.

There are some questions that remain about this process. How will the government ensure the inquiry remains fully independent and free from political influence and pressures, regardless of those strong pressures that they will face, including from within this House, and that it runs to timetable. In light of the recent resignations from the previous panel, our Ministers still in touch with those women to offer them the chance to rejoin this process, that now it is gaining some pace. Can the Home Secretary confirm what steps the inquiry will take to maintain the trust of the victims and their families? On the matter of the case in J reviews, will she commit to implementing all of the previous recommendations from previous reports? Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, the National Audit highlighted the the incompleteness of data, but it was suggestive of concerning trends related to the modes of organisation and how those relate to the ethnicity, particularly in those areas where police were recording appropriate data.

The Home Secretary rightly mentioned cohesion in her statement. How will this inquiry avoid stigmatising entire communities and undermining efforts to improve cohesion in this subject and in others adjacent, while thoroughly investigating the matter and ensuring that victims get the justice that they deserve.

13:56

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesman for his for his remarks. Let me reassure him. I think the track records of the chair and the two panel members speak for themselves. These are three women who have a long track record of holding public authorities to account. They have done so in the case of Baroness Longfield, the chair, under different political parties. I think they have shown in their in their work that they are unafraid of whoever the political masters might be when it comes to holding either police forces, local authorities or other organisations to account.

So I think we should take some encouragement from their track record. And I know that Baroness Casey recommended these individuals because of their track record and their deep experience in holding authorities to account, and I'm sure they will bring all of that experience to bear as they conduct the work of the national inquiry. Now, as for the panel of victims and survivors, they've been written to by the chair and the panel today, the particular panel that was set up in order to help get the inquiry going will now necessarily disband, because the inquiry will now get up and go get up and running.

However, the inquiry will itself have a victims charter that will set out the way that the inquiry will ensure that victims and survivors are at the heart of this process, and they feel a sense of confidence and trust in the work that the inquiry is doing. On earlier recommendations from previous reports, he will know that we are commencing our work on all of the recommendations made by Baroness Casey in her national audit, and we continue our work in implementing the recommendations made by the inquiry, and there will be more announcements to come later this week and next on on on those, which I won't pre-empt in the debate today.

And let me just say on avoiding stigmatising entire communities. I totally hear and understand the point that he's making. It's obviously of concern to many members, including myself, in this House. But let me say to him, in my experience, every community wants these people locked up. Once these individuals, these vile rapists, to face the full force of the law, and perhaps those who feel stigmatised by the behaviour of these criminals, might even feel that more strongly than than others. But I think it's it's in everyone's interest to make sure that we get to the truth.

And there is never anything to be afraid of the truth. Once we've established truth, justice can take place and we as a society can learn lessons for the future.

13:59

Jim McMahon MP (Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton, Labour )

- -

Jim McMahon thank you, Mr. Speaker. The announcement of the chair panel, terms of reference and timelines are welcome. Survivors have waited to engage in the formal process, and it's important for them and for others yet to come forward, that it leaves no stone left unturned. It's not restricted by time, and it follows the evidence wherever it may lead. We've heard quite a lot about race, and that being an important characteristic of the form of abuse that we're talking about here.

But can we not lose sight of class? Of course, the perpetrators were, by and large, Pakistani men, but the social workers were not. The police officers were not. And they had a view of these girls that I think absolutely determined how they were treated. But can I ask the Home Secretary to confirm that the national inquiry format, together with Deep Dive, will ensure that cross-border offending, which transcended local authority and police boundaries, will be and not allowed to fall through the net.

14:00

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Well, let me reassure my hon. Friend absolutely on the point he makes on cross-border offending that will not be allowed to slip through the net, and that is something that the chair and her panel members have already confirmed. Let me say also to him, it makes a really important point, which I think no one in this House should lose sight of as well, which was the view that many in society took of the girls that were raped and abused. In this way.

They were seen by many parts of society and some local, some in local authorities, some in policing elsewhere, as well as essentially white trash, that these girls were somehow not really children, that they were making decisions as if they were in control of their lives, that they were not victims of coercion and serious abuse. And and that is why I think this process is so essential, so that that moment of reckoning that is required because of this shocking scandal is, is true and fair to the victims in every way.

So both the criminal justice response that goes after the vile perpetrators of the crime, but also to those in our state institutions that thoroughly let these women, these girls down.

14:01

Rt Hon Dame Karen Bradley MP (Staffordshire Moorlands, Conservative)

- -

Chair of the Home Affairs >> Chair of the Home Affairs Committee, Dame Karen Bradley you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. And can I thank the Home Secretary for her statement and welcome the for her statement and welcome the appointment of the noble Baroness Longfield as chair of the panel? She is a has a great track record and I've worked with her myself over many years and I'm sure we'll do a very thorough job. I'm also very grateful that victims are being put at the centre of this inquiry.

This is about the victims. We cannot forget the terrible suffering that they've had, and they must be front and centre of everything that is done by the inquiry. But can I ask the Home Secretary around what will happen if, during one of the local inquiries, some new evidence or new issue arises, will it be possible to go back and look at previous inquiries? Will it be possible to even go back and look at those inquiries that have already completed locally, but where perhaps certain issues were not identified that do come along as part of this work?

14:01

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Well. her, for her comments and her question. Let me assure her victims and survivors will be at the heart of the inquiry. That is clear in the draft terms of reference and the fact that there will be a charter that the chair and the panel will create, I think, will give some comfort to victims and survivors as to how they will be able to inform the work of the inquiry, and also give them some comfort about the trust and confidence that they can place in the process as well.

Both of which I think are are very much necessary in terms of evidence. In the end, the inquiry has to go where the evidence takes them. What I am sure of is that they have the freedom to pursue that evidence wherever it may lead, and then make their recommendations. That could mean new criminal cases are pursued. It could mean other action against public authority figures. It could mean that there are gaps in the law that need to be filled as well.

But what I am sure is that the draft terms of reference and they will be consulted on. And if people feel they need to be strengthened, I'm sure they can engage with the chair and the panel to do so. There will be a period of consultation, but the intention is to make sure that this inquiry does the job that should have always been done, which is make sure that the criminal justice system is fit for purpose, but that there is accountability for everyone else who let these girls down.

14:03

Paul Waugh MP (Rochdale, Labour )

- -

Paul Waugh thank. welcome the appointment of Anne Longfield as the chair of this new independent inquiry into national grooming gangs? The key is to find the facts and for the evidence, wherever it leads. As you just said during the trial of some of the Rochdale child rapists earlier this year, the prosecution said that the abuse of the girls took place and I quote, under the noses of social workers and others who had done, who should have done far more to protect them.

Does the Home Secretary agree that we need to hold to account anyone who ignored these crimes and that no council, no police officer, no social worker, no racial group should ever be exempt from the scrutiny of this new inquiry.

14:04

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

My my hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I strongly endorse every every point that he has just made. There will be no place to hide for those who hurt these girls and those who let them down and allowed them to be hurt. And it is important that this inquiry finally provides us, all of us as a country, with the answers that we need so that we can learn those lessons, bring a measure of justice to the victims in this case, and make sure that this never happens again.

Leigh.

14:04

Rt Hon Sir Edward Leigh MP (Gainsborough, Conservative)

- -

The Home Secretary, knows that.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Admire her personally, and she's a devout Muslim lady and I share a devout Muslim lady and I share many of her values. I think she's uniquely well placed to comment on this and to explain and give this and to explain and give confidence that. What is it about these Muslim men that they felt these Muslim men that they felt they could behave in this way? And can she explain that this is a if it is a very small minority? See, it is a very small minority? See, can't you see what I'm trying to get at that she can actually approach this in a way that can explain this in a way that some of us can't, because nobody can ever accuse her of being racist, and nobody can ever accuse her of not wanting to get to the truth of this.

14:05

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

I thank the Father of the House for his question. It was difficult to find yourself as a spokesperson for billions of people around the world. But let me let me say to him, let, let let me say to him as a personal perspective and based on my own constituency experience, that of my family, my friends, the community that I belong to back home in, in Birmingham, there is nothing Muslim or Islamic about the acts that these evil men have perpetrated.

It is not behaviour that any of us would accept or tolerate it is it? All of these things are crimes and and I don't know anybody that doesn't believe that these people should be locked up for a very, very long time. And I also know about the the anxiety, the fear that members of this particular faith minority community that I belong to feel when the these are the stories that are in the news because they feel that that is a collective view that is then taken of the whole community.

It's why I made the point in my speech about making sure that we go after the perpetrators of these evil crimes, and that we do not allow the behaviour of this minority to affect the way that we relate to the rest of the law abiding citizens of this community in our country. We are very lucky to live in a very diverse country. We largely do a good job of holding all of the different peoples of our country together. It does mean that we should always pursue justice without fear or favour, because in the end, that is the only way to maintain confidence in our system of justice, but also to make sure that we don't inadvertently harm community relations.

Which is what I think has happened because of the actions of those who look the other committed.

14:06

Anna Dixon MP (Shipley, Labour)

- -

Anna Dixon thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. >> I'd just like to commend the Home Secretary for the tone in which she has approached this very which she has approached this very sensitive subject. I met with victims and survivors in West Yorkshire, including representatives of the Bradford survivor leadership group brought together by West Yorkshire Mayor Tracy Brabin and the deputy mayor and police and Crime commissioner Alison Lowe. Those victims and survivors told the gathered group of MPs that they wanted action.

They were very clear that they wanted to make sure there was implementation of past inquiries, and I'm glad that this government has wasted no time in implementing the J review. And as the Home Secretary has confirmed today, the other recommendations in cases, National audit. The second thing they said was that they wanted us to learn from good practice. And I would commend that. The incoming chair, Baroness Longfield, looks at some of what West Yorkshire Police are doing. Operation Dales Way has has made convictions since 2016 of of many defendants with over 2000 years of imprisonment.

And the third and final thing, Madam Deputy Chair, is ongoing engagement. So I would just like to invite Baroness Longfield to come and listen to the victims and survivors in Bradford and West Yorkshire. Thank you.

14:08

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Well, let me thank my hon. Friend. I'm sure that the chair and her panel have heard the request made of the visit to her, her area. She'll understand. I won't speak for the chair and the panel members, but I know that members across this House will want to make representations about their local areas, and I'm sure all of that will be taken under consideration. My hon. Friend will know that Baroness Longfield in particular knows Bradford well, having gone in to help turn around children's services in in that local authority in relation to a different matter.

But she does she does know the area well, and I do recognise that there are already some improvements that have been made by her local police as well, and some lessons have already been learned. It's important that whilst the inquiry will make recommendations in the future about things that we need to do at national level to learn the lessons, to make sure such a such, such criminality cannot take place. Again, the the good practice that we already have should still be shared with authorities all over the country.

And I will be talking to Baroness Longfield about how we make sure we don't lose current good practice whilst we wait for inquiry.

14:09

Munira Wilson MP (Twickenham, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Munira Wilson. >> Munira Wilson. >> Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I welcome the Home Secretary's statement. >> Today and I welcome.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Today and I welcome. The appointment of Baroness Longfield, who I think will be an excellent chair. When I met professor J. At the start of the year about her inquiry, there were two things she impressed upon me the importance of a child protection authority and the importance of data sharing. The safeguarding Minister announced the establishment of a child protection authority earlier this year. Will the Home Secretary update the House on progress in establishing that authority and on data sharing? We on these benches have supported the government in their legislation to create a single unique identifier.

Unfortunately, there are people outside this place who are suggesting it's the precursor to digital ID for children and that government will miss will inappropriately use children's data. Will she reassure parents and carers out there that the government will guard children's data with the utmost security, and only use it to keep children safe and improve services for them?

14:10

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Let me thank the hon. Lady, and absolutely on her second point, this data is to keep people, keep children safe, and we have a duty to children in our country. And the recommendation on data sharing was well made and absolutely the right thing to do. The unique identifier is there as a measure of child safety and not for anything else. So let me provide that reassurance. I think some are some people have maybe legitimate concerns in this area and need that reassurance.

I think others are seeking to make some mischief, but whatever, whatever it may be, I can confirm that the unique identifier is there as a child protection measure and the child protection measure alone. And then on the top protection authority. She is tempting me to gazump future announcements that are imminent. I won't do so, but let me assure her that there will be a progress update very, very soon.

14:11

Chris Murray MP (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh, Labour)

- -

Chris Murray. welcome this significant set of announcements from the Home Secretary and the strong panel members appointed? The Home Secretary will be aware that the Scottish Government has finally announced a review of grooming gangs in Scotland. The chair, Alexis Jay, has said Scotland does not grasp the scale of child sexual exploitation. I know from my own previous experience working, preventing trafficking that children are trafficked between Scotland and the rest of the UK for abuse.

So can the Home Secretary confirm that this inquiry will liaise and collaborate with colleagues in Scotland? And Home Office officials will do what is needed to support it. Abusers work across the border and so we must as well. Thank you.

14:12

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

I thank my hon. Friend, for for his question. The the matters pertaining to local authorities and police forces are, of course, necessarily devolved matters. And so large part of the inquiry is therefore necessarily only on devolved territory. But it will make national recommendations. And I do note the work that is now happening in Scotland in relation to grooming gangs. And again, I'm sure the chair and the panel will make sure that there is some discussion whilst respecting the boundaries of devolution, but where there is best practice to be shared, or of course, we know that this criminality does not respect borders, that that is very much taken into account.

14:12

Rt Hon Mark Pritchard MP (The Wrekin, Conservative)

- -

Mark Pritchard. >> Mark Pritchard. >> Thank you, Madam Mr Speaker, can I welcome the Home Secretary's statement today? And also I statement today? And also I associate myself with her reply to the Father of the House. And it's absolutely right. No community, whether ethnic or religious, should be stigmatised as a whole. But she mentioned in a statement, British Asian, can I say that some of my British, Hindu, British, Asian, Hindu, British, Asian, Sikh community are rather fed up of both media and in this place, a generic British Asian remarks and statements being made, and I hope that the inquiry will be more definitive and descriptive.

And she mentioned religion in her in her own statement. Telford and Wrekin, she will know, had its own local inquiry. The Tom Crowther in Inquiry, her predecessor, said that there were still, to paraphrase, a gaps to be filled since that inquiry. Will she support me in calling for the national inquiry to come back to Telford and Wrekin to ensure that everything that needs to be done is being done? And finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, she mentions a three year timetable taking us to March 2029.

If the election, which she may be the Labour leader by then, in May 20th is in May 2029 and prorogation is in March 2029. Will she commit to the victims and to this House, and to all of our constituents that the inquiry will report, even if there is a general election in 2029?

14:14

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

I thank the hon. Member for his questions. Let me say on, I've heard much the same complaint from Asian men in my own constituents who are not Muslim or of Pakistani heritage, but are of different Asian heritage. That the confusion in the descriptions they feel also, you know, stigmatises a wider group of people. I think we should all just agree we should not be stigmatising innocent people and law abiding citizens in our country, no matter who they are, because that is the wrong.

That is absolutely wrong in every way. We should go after the criminals who have committed these atrocious crimes. And the best way, in the end, to resolve these matters is just to have accurate ethnicity data that is collected. That was the gap that Baroness Casey found in her national audit is a gap that has existed for many years. It is a gap that I intend to put right. As I said in my statement, the Home Secretary does not, in fact, have the power to mandate the collection of good quality ethnicity data.

I will legislate in order to change that and make sure that every Home Secretary and future has that power. And it is my own view that we should collect ethnicity ethnicity data for all offences. Because actually, the best way to deal with suggestions of conspiracy or people thinking that some some communities are allowed to get away with certain types of behaviour or that the state doesn't wish to know, or the full facts of any cases to just put all of those allegations, claims, counter-claims to bed.

The best thing we can do is have the transparency of accurate data, and that is how we will seek to proceed as a government. Let me say to him on Telford I very much hear the case is made. I will resist the the temptation to tell the chair and the panel where they should go, where they will go for their local investigations is a matter for them, and they will set out the criteria by which they will make that decision themselves in accordance with the draft terms of reference.

But he has made his case powerfully. I'm sure that will have been heard by the chair and the panel members. And let me say to him, you know, the three year timetable, we we have followed the recommendation of Baroness Casey very closely. And she said three years is the right amount of time to both do a good job and get the work done and make those recommendations. And nothing, not even a general election, should get in the way of that.

14:16

Harpreet Uppal MP (Huddersfield, Labour)

- -

Harpreet Uppal thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

can I welcome. The appointment of Baroness Longfield and the two panellists to this inquiry? And can I just ask, particularly for victims and survivors, you've sorry the Home Secretary has mentioned that they Secretary has mentioned that they will be at the heart of the inquiry. Can she set out a little bit more about what that participation looks about what that participation looks like? And just on the potential reinvestigation of 1200 cases, which is really important, we must which is really important, we must make sure that happens.

But we already know too many victims and survivors are facing unacceptable court delays. So what discussions is she having with colleagues at the Ministry of Justice to make sure that progress happens at pace? Thank you.

14:17

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Thank. You. >> Well, she she's absolutely right about the need for victims and survivors to be at the heart of this process. That is very clear from the draft terms of reference from the draft terms of reference to begin with, the the chair and the panel alongside Baroness Casey, will meet with the victims and Survivors panel who've been involved in getting this inquiry set up and get it running. And they will then also create the charter, which will set the framework by which the inquiry will ensure that victims and survivors are at the heart of this inquiry, and to give those victims and survivors the confidence and trust in the process that that they rightfully ask for and and need.

And I'm sure that the that the chair will will be very strong in putting this across. Let me also say to her, I used to be the Lord Chancellor and Secretary for justice. I know the issues of delays in the criminal justice system across the board very well, and we are working very closely with our colleagues in the Ministry of Justice to ensure that that old adage, justice delayed is justice denied, does not come true for these victims.

14:18

Robbie Moore MP (Keighley and Ilkley, Conservative)

- -

Robbie Moore.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do have an urgent plea for the Home Secretary and the new chair, Baroness Longfield, who I know will Baroness Longfield, who I know will be watching today. They will both know that, shockingly, Keighley and the wider Bradford district have never had a full independent inquiry, despite an cryer raising the alarm more than 20 years ago. the alarm more than 20 years ago. Madam Deputy Speaker, myself, leading child abuse solicitor David Greenwood, local survivor Fiona Greenwood, local survivor Fiona Goddard, supported by more than 5000 local residents, have written to the new incoming chair urging her to immediately launch a targeted inquiry across Keighley and the wider Bradford district.

So can the Home Secretary ensure that Baroness Longfield sees our letter, understands the overwhelming public will across Keighley for this issue and meets with Fiona, David and myself at the earliest opportunity so that we can ensure that Bradford District is at the heart of this national inquiry. Secretary.

14:19

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Let me thank the hon. Member for his contribution and he's made a very strong and very powerful case for the inclusion of Bradford and Keighley into into the the inquiry as part as one of the local areas for a local investigation. I hope he'll understand why I won't make commitments on behalf of Baroness Longfield today, but I know that she will see this debate. She will hear all of these representations and Baroness Longfield and the panel members will very soon set out the criteria by which they will make these decisions about where they will go for local investigations.

And I know that she and the panel members will want to engage with members in this House, and I hope that he will take some reassurance from that. But I know he's a doughty campaigner from his local area, and I'm sure that those representations will be heard.

14:19

Sam Carling MP (North West Cambridgeshire, Labour)

- -

Sam Carling.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And can I also. Hugely welcome the appointment today of the chair and panel members, all of whom are and panel members, all of whom are brilliant appointments, who I know will do a very thorough job. I'm very pleased to see in the terms of reference, reference to religion. The previous inquiry unveiled serious problems in religious groups of many different faiths, groups of many different faiths, many of which also operate as charities. Can the Secretary of State outline what progress the government has already made on government has already made on implementing recommendations from that previous inquiry? And she also asked the relevant Minister to meet with me to discuss strengthening charity regulations so that any religious organisations operating as charities that have that are found to have played a part in this can face action.

14:20

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Home Secretary, I.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friend. I believe that he has already met the Minister for safeguarding, but she has just told me she's very happy to meet with me she's very happy to meet with him again, so I'm sure that that meeting will take place as quickly as possible. He will know that we as possible. He will know that we are pressing ahead with implementation of the the recommendations, as well as the recommendations, as well as the Casey audit recommendations as well. If there are any gaps, we will of course seek to fill them.

But the course seek to fill them. But the first thing is, I think to meet the test of the recommendations that have already been made, but I look forward to discussing this further with him in due course.

14:21

Sarah Pochin MP (Runcorn and Helsby, Reform UK)

- -

Sarah Pochin. Thank you, Madam. today by the Home Secretary into this long overdue inquiry and welcome the reassurance she has given that the victims of predominantly British Pakistani rape gangs will be properly consulted and involved in the inquiry. But can she confirm that her safeguarding Minister will be called as a witness in this inquiry? As someone who has voted against an inquiry, an inquiry earlier this year and who in whom victims lost all confidence through.

14:21

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Well, firstly, the Minister for safeguarding will happily talk to anyone, anywhere under any auspices about the need for justice for victims and survivors of these heinous crimes. Let me just say to the hon. Lady, I hope the House can elevate beyond party political point scoring, because the most important thing here is to deliver the measure of justice that is needed for the victims and survivors, survivors of these horrific crimes. They will be at the heart of this inquiry, and the inquiry will go wherever the evidence takes it.

14:22

Catherine Atkinson MP (Derby North, Labour)

- -

Catherine Atkinson. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I. focus on victims and survivors and her commitment that they will remain at the forefront of the inquiry's approach. But can she also ensure that the findings and recommendations of previous inquiries and investigations are also implemented, so that the voices of victims who have already shared their horrific stories are never forgotten?

14:22

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Let me absolutely give her that reassurance, and I hope that the progress the government is making on implementing previous recommendations gives her and others some more of that reassurance. In the end, I think we prove ourselves to victims and survivors here by doing and by taking the action that is so desperately needed, both from older recommendations and also from the new ones that will come.

14:23

Rt Hon Sir Julian Lewis MP (New Forest East, Conservative)

- -

So Julian Lewis. >> Very few of us here today were present in 2003 when the then MP for Keighley, Mrs. Ann Cryer, a courageous Labour member on the left of her party, spoke out about these grooming gangs for her troubles. She was smeared as a racist, she was shunned and she was threatened to the point at which she had to have safety devices and emergency alarms in installed in her home. Will the Home Secretary join with me in paying tribute to her courage? Belatedly, it has never received any recognition of which I'm aware.

And does she not think that Ann Cryer might even now have some insights to share with an inquiry as to what it's like when the people who are supposed to be protecting people close ranks to protect the offenders. Instead.

14:24

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Home Secretary. >> Home Secretary. >> Well, let me right the wrong immediately of in terms of not having the recognition that she having the recognition that she deserves. And let me pay for some tribute to the work that she did in exposing these not just the crimes themselves, but also the state failure that meant that so many people who are supposed to keep young girls safe were looking the other way. He's absolutely right. It took immense courage for Ann to speak out all those years ago, and she has herself deep experience and expertise here, which I'm sure that Baroness Longfield and others will want to avail themselves of.

It can be a lonely road when you're exposing this kind of criminality, but also when you're holding to account other parts of the state that might not want to face up to what they have done. She walked that lonely road, and we're only here today with the knowledge that started.

14:24

Luke Myer MP (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, Labour)

- -

Luke Myer.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. There's a concerning tendency, I think, to view these issues as historic, when in all likelihood historic, when in all likelihood there are working class children being failed by institutions right now all across our country. And so now all across our country. And so can the Home Secretary confirm that the inquiry will be able to respond to new information as it comes to new information as it comes forward? And in terms of the behaviour of institutions, can the Home Secretary confirm that the Home Secretary confirm that the inquiry will be able to account for that as well? And actionable, clear recommendations will be included to stop these failings happening again?

14:25

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Home Secretary let me say yes to him on both of those counts and give him that reassurance that that he has sought is absolutely the case that as new information or evidence comes to light, the inquiry will be able to pursue that and will work very closely with law enforcement and others to make sure that that happens. He is right. Sadly, devastatingly, it is undoubtedly the case that working class children are once again today being let down and being hurt because those who should have kept them safe are not keeping them safe.

And that is why this government will never stop in the work that we're doing across government, to safe.

14:26

Mr Will Forster MP (Woking, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Will Forster thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, I welcome the Home Secretary's statement on the progress on this inquiry. My local authority, Surrey County Council, has at best been slow to acknowledge their failures in child abuse and child safeguarding. In terms of the case of Sarah Sharif from Woking, how will the government ensure that both police forces and local authorities fully cooperate with this inquiry, particularly in areas with a history of underreporting, cover up transparency?

14:26

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Yeah. no local authority, whoever they are, will be able to resist a local investigation if that is what the chair of the panellists wish to occur. And once they are underway with their local investigations, they will in the end make national level findings and recommendations which the government will then respond to. So I would envisage that in the end, whether an area is part of a local investigation or not, every area across England and Wales will have lessons to learn and legal duties that they will have to fulfil.

And I am sure that once the inquiry is reported, there will be potentially further legislation or other action that will be taken.

14:27

Chris Vince MP (Harlow, Labour )

- -

Chris Vince. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I thank the Secretary of State for her statements. I particularly welcome the part about closing the loophole with regards to taxi loophole with regards to taxi regulations. In my first outing in this place, I spoke about the challenges and the problems caused by the loophole of cross-border hiring. Can I ask the Secretary of State to work at pace with her colleagues in the Department of Transport? I see one on the front bench now to ensure that this legislation gets through, and those people that are using taxis across the country feel safe.

14:27

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Cat Smith well, firstly, let me >> Cat Smith well, firstly, let me pay tribute to my hon. Friend and the work that he has done on taxi the work that he has done on taxi regulation, and we would happily make sure that we keep discussing with him the measures that we are bringing forward. And then let me provide him with the reassurance that we are working very closely with our colleagues in the Transport Department to make sure that the legislation in the English devolution Bill is absolutely fit for purpose and does exactly what he and I would want it to do.

14:28

John Lamont MP (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk, Conservative)

- -

John Lamont.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A review of. The grooming gangs evidence in Scotland, but this falls short of a full inquiry and disappoints many of the victims. Now I've asked for this before, but please, please will this UK government extend its will this UK government extend its inquiry to the whole of the UK so that the victims of these appalling crimes get the justice that they deserve? Grooming gangs operate in all parts of the UK. So should this inquiry. Yeah.

14:28

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

inquiry. Yeah. >> Home Secretary. >> Well look, I, I hear that the absolute force with which the point is made and I, you know, I have a lot of sympathy with what the hon. Member has said and what my own colleagues from Scotland have said in relation to the fact that grooming gangs do not respect boundaries. And that is a point. I know that the inquiry chair and panel will also take on board many of the public authorities that have failed children sit within devolved, devolved departments.

And so this is necessarily an England and Wales inquiry primarily, but I would expect there to be discussions with colleagues in the Scottish Government and to make sure that all of the lessons are learned across the whole of the United Kingdom, because in the end, these are all our children and we all safe.

14:29

Dr Scott Arthur MP (Edinburgh South West, Labour)

- -

Scott Arthur Scott Arthur. >> Scott Arthur Scott Arthur. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do thank the Secretary of State for her statement and also the for her statement and also the Minister for safeguarding for the work that she has done in this area over many, many, many years. And what should shame us is that so many people have waited for many years for the announcement we have heard today. And I think, as I think the Member for New Forest East hinted, some MPs were actually born after some of these offences took place.

It is an absolute disgrace that it has taken so long to get to this place, and it does come a week after, as we have heard, that the Scottish Government have been shamed into considering their own inquiry. And I do use that word shamed deliberately. But can I ask the Secretary of State and £65 million is a lot of money, but is it enough for more be made available if needed? And how will she keep herself updated? And us here in this chamber updated on the progress of the inquiry, particularly the the perspective perspective of those survivors.

14:30

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

I thank my hon. Friend. Look, it's an independent inquiry. So I think that there should be and there will be some necessary limits in my engagement with the chair and the panel, because it's an independent inquiry. They will go wherever the evidence takes them. I'm sure I will receive updates in terms of timescale and making sure that we, we are within the three years that has been agreed as the timescale for this, this inquiry. Let me reassure him.

I'm sure that the correct level of resources have been made available to ensure that the inquiry can undertake its incredibly important work. And just look, I hear the point on devolution. I won't repeat the earlier answers that I have given, but I hope that given the subject matter and the fact that it should be of interest to all members in this House, regardless of which part of the United Kingdom we come from, that we are all doing everything we can to keep children in our country safe, that these lessons are learned across the board by everyone.

14:31

Mr Joshua Reynolds MP (Maidenhead, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Joshua Reynolds can I ask the Home Secretary what steps the government are going to take across government to ensure that whilst this inquiry is ongoing, the victims of these horrible crimes are being given proper support. Whilst this process is undergoing Home Secretary.

14:31

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Yes, let me provide him with that reassurance. Firstly, because Operation Beacon Port is up and running and that is the National Crime Agency work to bring what have been closed cases, to take a fresh look and bring more perpetrators to justice separately. Also, once the inquiry is up and running, there will be a victims charter which will set out the way in which the inquiry will engage with victims and survivors to give them the trust and confidence that they need and deserve.

14:32

Rupert Lowe MP (Great Yarmouth, Independent)

- -

Rupert Lowe. been running our own independent inquiry into the rape gang scandal, funded by over 20,000 concerned people. Our hearings are taking place in early February next year. We made immense progress to date, with more to come. Will the Home Secretary meet with me to discuss how our work could potentially assist the national inquiry, which we all want and need to succeed without further delay? As the rapes are continuing today?

14:32

Rt Hon Shabana Mahmood KC MP, The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Birmingham Ladywood, Labour)

- -

Well, let me say to him, there is only one statutory inquiry, and is only one statutory inquiry, and that is the one that this government has initiated, for whom I for the chair and panel of which I have announced today. Let me also encourage, if he has collected evidence under his own auspices, that is relevant to either current or past criminal proceedings or other evidence of state failure, he should make that available to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

statutory inquiry. Presentation of Bill Munira Wilson.

14:33

Presentation of Bills

>> Commissioner. >> Special Educational. >> Needs and Disabilities.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Needs and Disabilities. Education profit cap bill. Second Reading. What day?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Second Reading. What day? Friday the 16th of January.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friday the 16th of January. Which brings us to the ten minute rule motion. Doctor Al Pinkerton.

14:33

Dr Al Pinkerton MP (Surrey Heath, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I beg to move that leave be given to bring a bill to place a duty on the Secretary of State to enter into negotiations with the European Union, to agree a customs union between the United Kingdom and the European Union, and for connected purposes. Madam Deputy Speaker, up and down the country, businesses know it, the public feel it, and it's time that this House find the courage to lift our whispered voices and admit it.

Brexit has been an abject economic failure. It's choked business investment shattered, economic resilience, strangled trade, shrunk the economy and left every single one of us poorer. The economic benefits of Brexit were only ever an illusory mirage, the kind of shimmering promise you see in the desert, in the midday heat, the kind of shimmering promise that lures you towards it, only to find it always agonisingly out of reach, a promise that dissipates altogether as the cool of the evening returns. Well, that chill has descended, and now we can see clearly that the promises of 2016 and the oven ready deals of 2021 were nothing more than the lukewarm figments of political opportunists who sought, and in some cases still seek advantage in populism and fragmentation and in fear.

Far from taking back control, today, our country feels more precarious than ever. We lurch from crisis to crisis, uncertain of who we are, what we stand for, and whether our children will be better off Here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here, here. Far from becoming a buccaneering Global Britain, the United Kingdom Global Britain, the United Kingdom is today weaker and more isolated than at any point in our recent history. Yes, far from lowering history. Yes, far from lowering food and living costs or slashing regulation, British businesses are regulation, British businesses are now buried under 2 billion bits of red tape that stretch 15 times around the circumference of the around the circumference of the Earth, all while the cost of living spirals even higher.

Far from securing the transformative trading arrangements that promised, the government has delivered, only Australia and New Zealand deals worth a combined 0.1% to to UK GDP, and exposing British farmers to tougher competition and diluted protections. The India deal would add just 0.13%, and the much heralded US agreement has shrunk from a growth opportunity into damage limitation following Trump's tariffs. Meanwhile, Madam Deputy Speaker, we have erected new barriers with our largest market, the European Union, which continues to represent around half our global trade.

The result? Tiny wins at the margins and a massive permanent hit at the core. That is not Global Britain, nor was it ever going to be. It's economics by consolation prize, and the country is paying the price. Just last month, the National Bureau of Economic Research, a leading US think tank, published a decade long analysis concluding that Brexit has reduced UK GDP by between 6% and 8%. The House of Commons library shows that Brexit is now costing the Treasury up to £90 billion every single year in lost tax receipts, money that could be supporting our NHS, our defence spending and our public services.

In practical terms, Madam Deputy Speaker, the average Britain today is between 2700 and £3700 worse off than if we had remained in the European Union. That is the reality of the Conservatives botched Brexit deal. So let me put this plainly Madam Deputy Speaker the most dishonest campaign in modern British political history, promised that Britain that Brexit would cost would save £350 million a week. Instead, Brexit is now costing this country £250 million every single day. That is why.

That is why we have the highest tax burden in 70 years. That is why families face sky high bills. That is why we remain trapped in a cost of living crisis. This is the lived reality of the very working people the government claims to champion, but for whom it shows neither resolve nor the political will to protect. And while the conservative benches and those behind me may chunter, it is the former leader and Prime Minister of the Conservative Party, Sir John Major, who noted Brexit is a flop.

It will not now leap up from its deathbed. The Liberal Democrats believe the most effective route to sustainable economic growth in our country is to rebuild our relationship with the European Union. Our single most important trading partner. Rejoin just last week, the Prime Minister himself said the Brexit deal has significantly hurt our economy. So for economic renewal, we must keep reducing frictions and move towards a closer relationship with the EU. That view was echoed by the deputy Prime Minister, who described a customs union as an inevitable journey of travel will.

My bill would propel us along that journey. It proposes a UK EU customs union covering most goods, with a formal mechanism for UK consultation on new EU trade deals that affect us. It would lift the man made constraints that are strangling our small and medium sized enterprises, many of which have stopped trading with Europe altogether. This bill is on the side of British business. The Federation of Small Business is clear. The greatest burdens fall on firms with the fewest resources to adapt.

Crocus, one of the largest horticultural businesses in the UK, based in my Surrey Heath constituency, tell me that trade barriers are adding friction, inflating supply chain costs and causing damaging delays at our borders. Others warn British developed innovations risk being lifted and relocated to the continent. British ideas nurtured by British universities lost because electoral expediency was placed above economic reality. Now, even if the government stayed within their own self-defeating red lines, which merely replicate Theresa may's failed framework, a better deal with Europe could generate 25 billion extra per year for the Treasury, but the British public and British businesses want this government to go further and to go faster.

At a time when ONS data shows rising numbers of young Britons leaving to work overseas, we have a national duty to support growth, to ease household pressure and give young people a compelling reason to build their futures here in the UK, as my party's former Northern Ireland spokesperson, I worked across the political divide to consider the practical implications of the Windsor framework. Red lines, green lanes, partial movements across the Irish Sea. These barriers still hamper our internal market. A bespoke customs union would cut costs, smooth trade and reduce daily frictions for businesses in Northern Ireland.

Those who value the union should seek more clearly than anyone. That co-operation strengthens it far more than isolation ever could. Madam Deputy Speaker, you do not strengthen the British economy by raising barriers on the market. That takes 41% of our exports. You strengthen it by removing the barriers created through a weak Prime Minister could pretend to be tough. A survey by the British Chambers of Commerce shows nearly half of exporters like customs procedures as their biggest barrier, and 39% cite documentation complexity.

The message from businesses is unambiguous reduce friction and unleash growth. Closer economic partnership with Europe is also a matter of our national security. For Russia is defined by military expansionism and destabilisation. China grows more coercive and authoritarian by the year. Under a second Trump administration, the United States has demonstrated a willingness to threaten and coerce even its closest allies in pursuit of hemispheric pre-eminence in the recent national security strategy. The US welcomes, and I quote, the growing influence of patriotic European parties and says its goal should be to help Europe correct its cultural current trajectory, a clear signal of intent to interfere in allies domestic politics.

In an increasingly fractious multipolar world, we must stand closest with those who share our values, our trade and our common security. Dear Madam Deputy Speaker, if we are serious about lifting this country out of stagnation, then we must get Britain growing again, get exporting again, and make Britain competitive again. A bespoke UK EU customs union would cut red tape, unlock investment and restore certainty to British business. To sit on our hands is to choose stagnation. To oppose this bill is to prolong the cost of living crisis.

To reject it is to hold back the small and medium sized businesses that form the backbone of our economy. This House today has a clear choice. We can remain on a path of managed decline, or we can choose a future built on growth, on confidence and on opportunity. We can unleash once again the resilience, the creativity and innovation of British business. I commend this bill to the House.

14:43

Simon Hoare MP (North Dorset, Conservative)

- -

The question is that the hon. Member have leave to bring in the Member have leave to bring in the Bill. I call Simon Hoare to speak for no more than ten minutes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Thank you very much indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker and I indeed, Madam Deputy Speaker and I rise to oppose this bill. And yes, for those who know me, I did actually say oppose. And smelling salts are available through the usual channels, I am sure. I listened very intently to what my friend, the hon. Member for Surrey Heath had to say, and he said it with great passion and his typical eloquence. And he and I have worked together on Northern Irish issues and indeed others, since he entered this place.

It's a pleasure to do so, and I'm sorry that we are on different sides, in separate sides this afternoon. It might be cheeky of me, Madam Deputy Speaker, to remind the hon. Gentleman, of course, that it was his party was the first party in this place that actually suggested a referendum on Britain's continued membership of the European Union, so that that is something which is often missed of Liberal Democrat leaflets. Maybe they're too busy, maybe they're too busy winning here to remind themselves of that.

Although the hon. Gentleman. The hon. Gentleman, also declared, as a matter of fact, that the United Kingdom closed its membership of the European Union, was weaker and isolated. I honestly cannot fathom how he can arrive at that conclusion. The convening powers, the convening powers of the scenes outside Downing Street yesterday, when we stood with allies in support of Ukraine, the recent state visits of the US president and the German president, the fact that this country is head of a commonwealth, a leading member of NATO and a permanent member of the Security Council, does not suggest to me a country which is weaker or more isolated.

Far from it. The two are entirely separate things. There are four reasons I believe, and I can say this, Madam Deputy Speaker, as somebody who voted to remain part of the European Union in the referendum and campaigned strongly to do so, but I accepted the result of the referendum as most people on these benches did. And I say to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath, who I woke up to hearing in my ear, now before anybody worries about that, yes.

I was, I was in my bedroom and he was on radio four. At least that's the story I'm telling everybody. And he said that we could be like Turkiye, but Turkiye, that was a relationship that he was suggesting to the listeners of the today programme. Turkiye Airlines trade policy and tariffs with the common external tariff for industrial goods. They have no say on EU trade decisions on agriculture or on services. And I say respectfully to the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues that in no way can meet the fundamental essay question that the electors of this country gave to us through that referendum decision.

They wanted us to forge our own destiny. Whether that was going to be a path that was without ripple or stumble stone, nobody knew. But that was the instruction which the British people gave. And Democrats of good faith said, we will abide by that decision. The hon. Gentleman's argument may be liberal, small l but democratic it. Certainly there are four clear reasons, as I see it, why this proposal in the bill deserves to be opposed.

The first is that it would fundamentally undermine the welcome and energetic efforts of His Majesty's Government, principally led by the right hon. Member for Torbay to continue to grow that iterative process of a relationship with the European Union without being part of it, that endeavour deserves the united support of all right, honourable and hon. Members in this House, because it will deliver. It will deliver, as always intended, through that organic process, identification of creases and an attempt to iron them out.

We all want to see small, micro and medium sized businesses flourish and prosper. We all want to see an increase in trade with the European Union, and we all want to see the uplifting benefit that that has to all of our citizens. But the proposal before us in this bill is not the way to achieve it, because, as I say, I believe it would fundamentally undermine the good offices of the government in trying to achieve what it is seeking to achieve.

My second point is that business needs certainty and heaven knows, through the whole process, and heaven knows through the. Now, I'm afraid, with the exception of about six who survived the 2015 cull, there are not many on the Liberal Democrat benches who served in this place. When we were trying to deliver Brexit, but the one thing that they would have taken away had they been here and thankfully, Madam Deputy Speaker, they were not the ones that they would have taken away was the business wanted certainty.

They are now slowly but surely, but with a certain degree of typical UK energy flare and a LAN meeting meeting the new trading regimes. And there are businesses up and down the country, small, medium, large and micro who are making a decent fist of it. We wish them well. The process which the government has underway is designed, is designed. Madam Deputy Speaker, if they wish to sort of shout like it's some sort of Harrogate Lib Dem spring fair feel, they can feel, they can feel, they can feel free.

So to do quite what Harrogate has ever done to deserve them, I do not know. I will leave that to the good faith of Harrogate. We wish them well. But. But to embark upon a customs union approach analogous to that of Turkiye would be, I think, a mistake, because it would. It would engender more uncertainty in the minds of British business, just as they are settling their trading patterns and getting their heads around things with the hope and promise that those creases are going to be further ironed out in the work which the government is doing through the right hon.

Member for Torbay. The third reason is that those trade deals already entered into, unless they met the requirements of the European Union, but have to be fundamentally rewritten or scrapped or scrapped. Now we are in the foothills of of trying to maximise the benefits of those trade deals. They were never easy to deliver, but to start to unpick them now would show a degree of bad faith and certainly uncertainty in the collected and settled mind of the British political class of this country.

And the fourth reason, which I would suggest is probably, Madam Deputy Speaker, the most compelling to even the most ardent rejoiners in Parliament is that the European Union doesn't want it. The European Union now sees us for what we are, whether we like it or not. We are a we are a third country and it is an enormous arrogance and maybe unlike many. But I've had the lucky and favourable opportunity of talking to senior EU officials about this very proposal.

There is neither interest in it or appetite for it. They want they want to engage with the government, as they are in the organic evolution of what we have. But they have spent and this is where we have to look at it from the other end of the telescope, the political leadership of the European Union, as far as they are concerned, have spent quite enough time dealing with the needs of the United Kingdom. They are very happy to engage in the tidying up exercise and the spreading out proposals which the government have, but to start from scratch in some sort of perverse Groundhog Day approach to how we withdraw from the European Union is an utter nonsense.

They are not interested in that. They don't want to go back to day one. They are perfectly happy with how things are and they want to see it evolve. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, for those for, I hope, clear and compelling reasons, I say to colleagues across the House whether they were ardent Brexiteers, ardent Remainers, or maybe even 1 or 2 who weren't entirely sure. This bill commands should command no support. It has no merit. It should be voted against. Should a division be called?

14:53

Division

15:08

Legislation: Second Reading of the Railways Bill

>> Railways Bill Second Reading now. >> The reasoned amendment in the name of Mr. Richard Holden has been name of Mr. Richard Holden has been selected Minister to move Second Reading. Secretary of State Heidi

15:08

Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)

- -

15:36

Rt Hon Richard Holden MP (Basildon and Billericay, Conservative)

- -

15:54

Navendu Mishra MP (Stockport, Labour)

- -

have benefited by taking all the profits. For too long, companies have been cashing in while have been cashing in while passengers pay the price with poor service. It's time to put passengers first and profits secondary. I have raised this a number of times with the Secretary of State Madam Deputy Speaker, but Redditch South station in my Redditch South station in my constituency has one train a week. It is simply unacceptable. Friends of South Station, who have met a number of times, have been campaigning for proper passenger rail services at the station for many, many years and I hope that with GBR, proper rail services will be restored to Redditch South Station.

In the latest reporting period, Redditch South recorded 102 passengers in an entire year. The recent increase in housing around Bury South and the changes in Redditch over recent years mean that we need proper rail services, proper connectivity. I also want to make reference to step free access because sadly, three out of five train stations in my constituency, Brinnington, Heaton Chapel and Reddish South do not have step free access and I want to see the step free access scheme access for all scheme to be increased in size.

Unfortunately, access for all scheme is very slow and the rollout tends to be sort of a system where you have to apply for funding. Accessibility of the North's rail stations is poor, with less than half of all stations having step free access, while some stations in the north have benefited from access for all. Progress has been slow, with an average of only three stations per year in the north benefitting from step free access. In response, North mayors, the North mayors and political leaders have been pressing for devolution in in terms of access for all funding to mayoral strategic authorities to ensure that decisions are prioritised locally and taken locally.

In terms of local stations, it is simply unacceptable that disabled people, people with mobility issues, people with health conditions are not encouraged to use the railways more because of the issues with step free access. I also want to pay tribute to Nathaniel Yates, who's a local campaigner, a young person who's been campaigning for step free access for a long time. And I know in the recent visit by the rail Minister to my constituency, Nathaniel was able to say hello to him.

I also think that Stockport station, which is one of the five stations in my constituency, it recorded over 4 million entries and exits in the latest reporting period. The passenger scheme is not staffed adequately. Avanti are responsible for staffing at my station at Stockport station, and a number of other staff members and passengers have told me that the coverage is simply not good enough. Davenport Station is not in my constituency, it comes under my neighbouring constituency, but I also want to see step free access there because a lot of people from my constituency use Davenport station and I know local councillors Wendy Wilde, Paul Wright and Nikki Davies have been campaigning for a long while for step free access at that station.

Sunday services continue to be a significant issue in terms of Northern Rail. Friends of Heaton Chapel station. I've met them twice in recent weeks, and a number of passengers and members of the group tell me that Sunday services at northern are simply not good enough. Northern is also failing to staff ticket offices adequately, in particular Brinnington in my patch. I've raised it with them in October. It's December now. It still doesn't seem to be staffed adequately. The ticket office needs to be staffed properly.

Can I also make a reference? I have raised this previously in the House, but funding for British Transport Police is is quite concerning. We had that sad attack in Huntingdon and can I pay tribute to the rail workers and passengers on that on that train? But the coverage for British Transport Police isn't isn't good enough. It needs its it needs more funding. Stafford Serco station frequently. Tell me about the low presence of BTP officers and I met with them recently on 28th of November.

In terms of British Transport Police, unfortunately crime is up 5.4%. Anti-social behaviour incidents are up by 9%, violent offences are up by 14%. BTP is facing an £8.5 million shortfall for the next financial year, receiving just 4.6% uplift against the force's 9.8% request. I have very limited time, so I'll just finish on the point of rolling stock companies. One aspect of the large scale profiteering on the railways is the rolling stock companies. These firms typically pay in excess of £200 million per annum in dividends, and Office of Rail and Road data tells us that they paid out 275 million last year, so I'd like to see more work on that as well.

Thank you for allowing me to contribute, madam Deputy Speaker, the.

15:59

Olly Glover MP (Didcot and Wantage, Liberal Democrat)

- -

16:10

Ruth Cadbury MP (Brentford and Isleworth, Labour)

- -

Chair of the Select Committee. Ruth Cadbury. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Deputy Speaker. >> And it's interesting, following the Member for Didcot and Wantage, I'm still trying to work out what the Lib Dem bill would include that this one doesn't. I, I welcome this bill universally agreed as long needed. It's the essential first next step in ensuring rail in Britain is more unified and delivers a rail system that is to be reliable, safe and provides value for money for passengers and for the taxpayer.

From the 1993 Railways Act, this led to 30 years of a poor deal for passengers, other customers and taxpayers. 17 different organisations providing track and trains, multiple fare options and prices, hundreds of staff employed to attribute the cost of delays, staff shortages, no single voice to address individual systemic failures of service. Yet a workforce that is universally committed to delivering high quality service to the passengers and to the customers. I particularly welcome that the long term rail strategy will be issued by the Secretary of State, setting out objectives for railways for the next 30 years, setting out the direction of travel for rail.

This will please so many stakeholders, particularly investors in rail, but also mayoral authorities and in fact all those who work in and use rail to. I welcome that clause 18 of the Bill includes duties on GBR to promote the interests of users and potential users of the railway, which includes and specifically includes disabled passengers, and to run the railway in the public interest, i.e. to meet social, economic and environmental objectives. And clause 18 has a series of significant clauses for GBR to promote the use of rail freight.

But whilst clause 17 requires the Secretary of State for transport to set out a target for the growth in rail freight, there is no such target for the growth in passenger demands in this bill. Madam Deputy Speaker, my committee launched an inquiry on this bill on November the 5th, the same day as the bill was published, seeking and we specifically focusing on three core aims of the reform improving rail travel for passengers, network access and devolution. We've published the evidence we've received so far and the oral evidence taken on the 26th of November.

Both are tagged to the this debate in the Order Paper. Firstly, on the passenger experience. This issue is central to all our constituents who travel by rail or would if it was more accessible, reliable or cheaper. It will. The Passenger Watchdog is a is a new voice providing advocacy and advice, sharing best practice and providing alternative dispute resolution. It specifically in as in clause 36, going to have a duty to have particular regard to the interests and needs of disabled passengers.

It will set standards on how travel information is provided, including when there's a disruption. It will handle complaints and delay compensation, and requires operators to make services accessible. These powers will, in London and Eurostar and on Eurostar will be covered by an expanded London TravelWatch. But on the detail of enforcement powers of clauses 42 to 47 give the Passenger Watchdog powers to receive complaints. But. And that is helpful. But I have a couple of questions for the Secretary of State.

Will the Passengers' Council be sufficiently independent, powerful and resourced to to challenge GBR to deliver meaningful change if needed? What will the governance relationship be between the watchdog, the ORR and the Rail Ombudsman? And what remedy will passengers have if the Passenger Watchdog recommendations are not adopted? Who will appoint members of the Council? The chair and will passenger groups and disabled people be represented on the board on accessibility? This isn't a particular interest for Transport Committee. Following the publication of our report Access Denied in February, I welcome that clause 18 includes the explicit needs of disabled passengers as a general duty, but it's only one of six duties that have to be balanced.

So what guidance is going to be provided to GBR to balance these needs against each other, to ensure disabled people aren't going to lose out yet again? So the wording in clause 18 on accessibility could be said to be slightly objective. So what safeguards are there from a future Secretary of State cutting costs, altering, diluting or even removing accessibility requirements on fares and ticketing? Again, we welcome a unified system and network access. The slightly less clarity over the future role of passenger open access access.

If the government does want to end open access for passengers, do they have a plan for retaining the benefits of open access, such as filling gaps, opening up new routes and promoting price competition on freight? How will the targets be aligned? I certainly will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Does the hon. Member agree that there is a danger also here of the conflict of interests? At present, the ORR, an independent body, holds the ORR, an independent body, holds the power to grant track access rights. Under this bill, these powers will transfer to GBR while powers will transfer to GBR while the Or role is watered down. If GBR the Or role is watered down. If GBR is able to block applications, they become judge and jury. Open access operators like Go-op may struggle to get the access rights they need

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to run new services, including through Melksham. There are some questions about

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There are some questions about the relationship between the Secretary of State, GBR and the ORR, and also the passenger watchdog, which we will certainly pursue and so I'm sure will others. So I just so I'm sure will others. So I just want to get on to devolution. It's devolution is central to the devolution is central to the government's vision. So I welcome that Scottish and Welsh governments and elected mayors will have greater control of their area, though an oversight.

Will there be an oversight role so that local decisions don't conflict with national priorities, such as providing access to rail freight? In conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker, I really welcome this bill. Unlike the two opposition amendments today, this bill will work if it relieves the Secretary of State from day to day operational decisions and let those who understand the rail system get on with delivering for the benefit of passengers, for the Robertson.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I support some of the aims and intentions behind this bill and on listening to the Secretary of State listening to the Secretary of State opening, I certainly agree with the reasons why she's doing it. It's just that I don't believe what she's doing will deliver what she says it will. Some of the key parts says it will. Some of the key parts of this bill are taken from the previous conservative government's

16:17

Joe Robertson MP (Isle of Wight East, Conservative)

- -

plans in 2023. That didn't, in the end, get realised due to the change of government at the election. And that is uniting rail and track now. that is uniting rail and track now. It's not inevitable that that can only be done by nationalisation. only be done by nationalisation. Indeed, the detailed plans of the last government would have seen that done under a concessionary scheme, not ideology, but pragmatism. Using the state and the private sector to deliver better railways.

A model very similar to TfL, designed by Labour and run by Labour in London. It's unfathomable why the government will not look at that sort of pragmatic scheme for the rest of the UK in this bill and I suspect, Madam Deputy Speaker, the only answer is the inevitable one offered by the shadow Secretary of State that it's a matter of ideology to satisfy union paymasters and to satisfy the backbenchers, that is the backbenches that fundamentally run this government, the backbenches that vetoed this government's attempts to do something about cutting the welfare bill last summer and ultimately vetoed those plans such that the Budget two weeks ago increase more taxes for more welfare.

It is about a payoff, Madam Deputy Speaker, which is politically prudent for the Secretary of State and the government, but bad for passengers. I did some market research earlier today. I travelled on a publicly owned service on a publicly owned track from Portsmouth Harbour to London Waterloo, and it was delayed for signal failure. In fact, I do market research on that route quite often. The track has been in the public sector for over a decade, and signal failure continues to be the most common reason for delaying that train.

Not historically, the privately delivered train company, but the publicly owned track. There is nothing inevitable about nationalisation, leading to improved services and without any guarantees in this bill that prices will be held down long term, or that services will improve and more passengers will travel by rail, then it is simply a matter of faith

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and belief, belief in nationalisation that drives it. I will give way. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Speaker. For my constituents in Bexleyheath and Crayford Southeastern was nationalised under the previous government, remains nationalised under this government. nationalised under this government. But by bringing it together this year with Network Rail into one organisation, we've seen the best customer satisfaction and journey times. You could see they are at the forefront of this programme. So the forefront of this programme. So will the hon. Member agree that the proof is in those statistics that Southeastern currently showing here?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here obviously wasn't listening to what I said at the beginning, which is I absolutely believe in which is I absolutely believe in uniting the trains and the track. A plan from 2023 by the previous conservative government. And I suspect if he is right about the improvements in his part of the world, that is the reason, not nationalisation, but bringing the nationalisation, but bringing the two together under similar decision making processes. Now, the Secretary of State opened also by saying she wants a railway system that is greater than the sum of its parts.

I agree, if she were to get on a train from Shanklin on the Isle of Wight and buy a National Rail ticket there and travel through to London Waterloo or Guildford, she would, like me, use a ferry service that connects part of that railway. Fares are not being frozen for that part of the rail route, because the Secretary of State has no powers to do it and is not creating any powers to do so. So in fact, the cost of rail travel from Sandown or Shanklin or Ryde on the Isle of Wight through to Guildford or to Waterloo, fares will go up if ferry companies, unregulated, put their fares up.

The Secretary of State has doing nothing to deal with the sum of that railway part. For people who live in my constituency. In fact. Worse, the government is extending the ETS levy to Solent Travel, meaning that Wightlink, for example, when it connects the railways. The ferry company says it will now be paying £1 million a year in extra charges because of that tax. Because of that levy extended to it. So while the government talks about freezing fares for mainland ferry, mainland rail travellers is in fact putting up the costs for Isle of Wight train travellers and the ETS, the carbon, the use of fossil fuels cannot be avoided crossing the Solent because there isn't the electric grid capacity on the mainland ports or on the Isle of Wight ports.

In order to allow the ferry companies to go fully electric. It's like the train, and that grid capacity won't be there until the mid 2030s, so this is a cost the government knows it's putting on Isle of Wight rail and road users, but it's exempted Scottish ferry companies because it says that those are a lifeline service. Well, Isle of Wight ferries are every bit a lifeline service for my constituents to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

access education, NHS, friends and family and all the things that everyone else enjoys. Steve Race.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Steve Race. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I want to start by thanking my right hon. Friend the Member for Swindon South for work on this Swindon South for work on this vital legislation which will bring the railways back together into one cohesive system, which should allow better planning to utilise capacity and increase passenger satisfaction. I'm pleased to see this Labour government making good on its

16:24

Steve Race MP (Exeter, Labour)

- -

government making good on its manifesto commitments to take back our railways into public ownership and to establish great British Railways, something that people in the great railway city such as Exeter, have long called for. After years of decay under the Tory government, putting passengers at the heart of every part of the rail industry was a promise that I and many of our colleagues here today ran on in last year's election, one that I'm proud to see coming to fruition. Since I was elected, I've been proud to continue to grow in size and economic importance.

One of the fastest growing cities in the country. Last year, our city was ranked sixth in the Public Good Growth for Cities Index. From climate tech to scientific research education in Exeter, we can see what good, equitable growth looks like, and public transport is a key driver of this. Indeed, Exeter and Devon folk are avid railway users. Our passenger numbers exceeded the pre-COVID peak long before many other cities. However, rail performance has often been poor under the current system, with all three major operators across the two main lines and the several branch lines being affected by long term delays, cancellations and critical infrastructure that needs investment.

At a time when residents in Exeter want more frequent and more reliable services, the opposite is being delivered under the current system and as we want to continue to grow our economy and attract inward investment, a fast, reliable and regular train network is needed now more than ever. So I very much hope that Great British Railways can be the organisation we need to take a better approach to operating our railways in the interests of passengers, if we are to deliver the sustainable economic growth that Exeter and Devon needs and can deliver upon.

I also welcome that Great British Railways will have the mandate to have a whole system view of investment, and will be able to judge where delivery will have significant impact in Exeter. In Devon. This should include backing the Devon Metro proposal, increasing services into and out of Exeter to one every 15 minutes on our lines by implementing passing loops on the South Western line and improving the signalling on the Barnstaple line to increase capacity and reliability. This will also further enable a modal shift in Exeter and a growing hinterland, incentivising people out of our cars and reducing some of the chronic traffic problems that we experience.

We also need to improve resilience of the line past Exeter to our great city neighbour of Plymouth and on into Cornwall, because while our famous main line is very scenic, it does occasionally fall into the sea or be buried by a landslide. As at Dawlish in 2014, reopening a completed line between Exeter and Plymouth, north of Dartmoor would add resilience to the network and would mean the peninsula is not cut off should Dawlish happen again. I also welcome the provisions to continue to allow open access operators on the network.

The experience of the Lumo Edinburgh to London service and the whole train service between Hull and London suggests that competition on the lines does indeed increase capacity and passenger numbers, rather than cannibalise numbers from elsewhere. Further devolution and local decision making are imperative to ensuring that regions like the South West are able to properly have a say over their own transport infrastructure, especially if we're able in Exeter and Devon to achieve the local government reorganisation and devolution that I believe will work for us.

So I welcome the commitment to embed the relationship between GBR and strategic mayors into the functionality of the organisation. Look forward to exploring how this will work effectively. GBR should also, I believe, be a real powerhouse and a driver of innovation, seeking out new innovation through its procurement, but also allowing the free use of data to continue to enable Start-Ups to build businesses and to thrive in the wider ecosystem. I also look forward to hearing from members during this debate and beyond about their vision of how GBR will look and feel in reality, I think a nimble and strategic organisation with a defined mandate in partnership with the DFT will more likely to deliver for passengers than a rather larger sort of bureaucracy.

And finally, I welcome the provisions on accountability in the bill. As the Secretary of State and Ministers will know, I look forward to lobbying them and GBR continually on providing lifts at my Saint Thomas and Polsloe bridge stations, as I do on many occasions. Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm proud to support this bill. And also, if I may say, I dedicate my words here to the hard working railway men of Exeter who set up our local party in the 1950s and who have played such significant roles as elected politicians in the development of my city and the county, and would be delighted by this return to a national railway system.

Thank you.

16:28

Ian Roome MP (North Devon, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Ian Roome. >> Ian Roome. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As the government moves to create a publicly owned Great British Railways, I wanted to speak on behalf of several thousand rail passengers in my constituency of North Devon and what they have suffered in recent weeks. We all want to see a rail network that delivers a fantastic service, supports the economy and protects the environment. In 2026, the last thing we want to see is ever more cars crammed onto our roads.

Last year, the North Devon Tarka Line, which runs 39 miles through my constituency and that of the right hon. Member for Central Devon, recorded a record 1 million journeys for the first time among the amongst the busiest branch lines anywhere in the South West. Figures from the Office of Road and Rail show football footfall at Barnstaple station, which is used heavily by young people and college students as skyrocketed by 63% since 2019. By far the biggest surge at any station in Devon and Cornwall, the Tarka Line has again set new records for passenger numbers nearly every month this year up to November.

When that success came to a grinding halt on 17th of November, every rain closed three bridges and seized all rail traffic between Barnstaple and Exeter. Since then, our line has been shut three times. This past Friday afternoon it was closed again due to signal faults, leaving hundreds of passengers stranded. In Exeter. The operator was issuing fresh warnings of likely cancellations just yesterday afternoon. If you were to ask those passengers what needs to be in this bill, few would argue the merits of public versus private ownership.

Instead, many in North Devon put up with immense overcrowding or worry that their train may not even turn up. Back in 2017, Network Rail committed £2.9 million to improvements on the North Devon Line, but this is only a tiny fraction of the capital investment in other parts of the country, and there are now hundreds of thousands more passenger journeys relying on this infrastructure. Greater accountability to the public will be important for our railways. However, public ownership will be doomed to fail if the government does not use this window of opportunity and the extra powers in this bill to make lines in rural areas like mine more resilient for the future, I will give way.

I thank my hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Member for giving. Way too many rural railway stations are not accessible for disabled people without support staff. Constituents without support staff. Constituents in Yeovil have had serious accidents at railway stations. Does my hon. Friend agree? While the government's accessibility priorities, which have been debated today are welcome, we. What we need

**** Possible New Speaker ****

today are welcome, we. What we need is a strengthened access for all programme. I will agree with my hon. Friend

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I will agree with my hon. Friend with a disabled access is is is absolutely necessary at all stations, particularly in rural areas. And I know my hon. Friend is a big advocate in Yeovil for promoting access ability for those that are disabled and need it, as the network and the operator are brought together, we need joined up planning for increased capacity and against bad weather. My party has supported freezing rail fares after years of price hikes, but for many of my constituents, it's no good buying a ticket for a train that is not running.

So I want to urge the government to resist declaring victory once public ownership is achieved. This is only the first stop. The long term planning will be the important part of this bill. We must give passengers in North Devon and many places like it, good reason to have faith in their railway, and it will need more than a new flag painted on the side of a train. So I'd like to ask the Minister what he plans to do next to make rural railway lines like

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Tarka Line ready for the 2030s. Thank you. I call Ben Goldsborough.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I call Ben Goldsborough. Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. This Railways Bill gives us a chance to deliver the gives us a chance to deliver the biggest reset in how we run our railways for a generation, by bringing operators and infrastructure together under a infrastructure together under a single guided mind, we will be able to make decisions faster, cut through duplication and finally

16:33

Ben Goldsborough MP (South Norfolk, Labour)

- -

through duplication and finally deliver improvements at pace. Passengers expect a unified system means clearer accountability, quicker upgrades and railways designed for people who rely on it every day. And crucially, it means ticketing that people can actually understand simple, consistent and truly passenger focussed. For communities like mine in South Norfolk, that matters enormously. One aspect of this bill that I'm very gratefully appreciate is around clause 18, with accessibility for all. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, I wouldn't be doing my job properly as South Norfolk MP if I didn't talk about Wyndham train station and its accessibility.

Now, colleagues may know that Wyndham station code is in South Norfolk. That doesn't mean weapons of mass destruction. It actually stands for we must deliver, and in this case, we must deliver step free access to platform two. Wyndham has waited 185 years since the station first opened, without step free access to the southbound platform. That means that if you're disabled, pushing a buggy or elderly with heavily heavy luggage, you simply cannot catch the southbound train. Instead, you must travel all the way north to Norwich to wait, turn around and come back again.

That's half an hour wasted and going completely the wrong direction. A modern railway worthy of a country cannot leave passengers behind like that. And so my first ask the Minister today is to make sure that you please give the green light to step free access improvements at Wyndham train station. With a single body overseeing both operators and track, there will finally be no excuse for this to be delayed any longer. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, while I'm speaking about rail in the East of England, I want to briefly highlight the long overdue upgrades to the Ely and Horley junctions.

Now this is again important within this bill. No. Ask the government to go a little bit further on freight haulage within this bill as we go forward, because these improvements have been talked about for decades and are essential. They would unlock nearly 3000 additional freight parts from Felixstowe, take 98,000 HGVs off the road, support 277,000 extra passenger journeys each year, reduce carbon emissions by 1.7 million tonnes over 60 years and generate almost £5 for every £1 invested. Quite simply, this is infrastructure that pays for itself many times over.

So my second ask to the Minister is please give the go ahead to the Ely Area Capacity Enhancement Scheme and the Horley Upgrade Scheme as well. The economic, environmental and connectivity benefits are too severe to ignore. Now the hon. Member, who is no longer in her place for Dwyfor Meirionnydd and raised a very important thing about heritage railways. Now based in Wyndham, the Wyndham Abbey station is on the Mid Norfolk heritage railway line. It's one of the longest heritage railway lines within the whole of the United Kingdom.

I'd strongly ask the Minister as well, to consider what we can do within this bill to ensure that safety aspects are maintained on these lines as well. Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill is about creating a rail system that works, one that is accountable, accessible and built around the needs of passengers. It will deliver improvements more quickly, support regional growth, and ensure communities like mine are not left behind.

16:36

Martin Vickers MP (Brigg and Immingham, Conservative)

- -

And with an immediate five minute time limit. Martin Vickers. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I speak in my capacity as a constituency member and also as chairman of the All-Party rail chairman of the All-Party rail Group. The all party group did indeed submit some proposals to the Secretary of State on the changes that she's bringing forward with these proposals. Deliver on improved rail freight and passenger services in my constituency or indeed across the network. There are lots of books.

Restructuring any industry can cause confusion and increase costs, and billions invested by the private companies will now disappear and have to be made up by the taxpayer. If we look back to the years before privatisation, when for much of the time the industry was in decline and desperate for additional resources, we we see a vision of the future. If the government are to achieve one of their key aims of economic growth, improve transport, infrastructure and rail network that provides for the needs of the freight sector must be a priority.

Ministers will have noted that the Rail Freight Group has suggested that the rail freight growth target of 75% by 2050 be put into law, and that discounts to encourage use of spare capacity be introduced. Section 17 of the bill does indeed state that the Secretary of State must set a target and keep it under review. Setting targets is easy. Delivering is much more challenging. Businesses in my constituency stress the urgency of a new east west freight corridor, and I'd like to hear the minister's response to that when he sums up later this evening.

Rail freight is important, of course, but equally important is, is the passenger traffic. And there's nothing more parochial than the transport question time. And the Minister will know that. Now he's going to take even more responsibility. That will become much more prevalent. And indeed, in my own constituency, I've been pressing for a direct rail service to be restored between Grimsby-cleethorpes and King's Cross, and I've been campaigning for that since 2011. British Rail withdrew the service in 1992. Local industry and passenger groups are pushing for it.

We've had endless possibilities. There was a Grand Central put forward an application to the Rail Regulator in 2015 which, had it stood alone, would have been accepted, but it was linked to extending services into North Yorkshire and that would have taken revenue away from the what was then the main franchise holder. We desperately need the service. It will link Haber and Barnetby stations in my constituency, which serve both Humberside Airport and the Port of Immingham, and it will then pass through my right hon.

Friend in Gainsborough's constituency at Market Rasen on that point. Yeah. I'm most grateful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To my hon. Friend. This line to London historic train is absolutely London historic train is absolutely vital. Grimsby and Cleethorpes is a huge conurbation, much the biggest combination probably in the country, combination probably in the country, not served by a direct train to London. We've been campaigning this for so long and I call on the Ministers now to just get moving on Ministers now to just get moving on this. We don't need the bill. We need action on a direct train from Grimsby and Cleethorpes, through

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Grimsby and Cleethorpes, through Market Rasen and Lincoln to London to revive the whole area. Because the Father of the House for that intervention. And of course it is possible, although LNER operates 5 or 6 services at present to Lincoln and the, it would be very easy to extend the extra 30 odd miles through to Grimsby and Cleethorpes. But there's also a possibility of an open access operator. And indeed Grand Central have got another application in which would provide a service from Cleethorpes through Scunthorpe and Doncaster to King's Cross.

But of course, the open access operators, judging by recent decisions, are cause for concern, as do those of us who want to see other lines improve as a result of competition. There's no doubt that the East Coast Main Line has greatly benefited from competition, as has been mentioned earlier by Hull Trains and also by Grand Central. They provide services to provincial towns that have been without a direct service for many, many years. I'm returning to the demands of my own constituency.

The Immingham area has two oil refineries, numerous power stations, petrochemicals, logistics. It is a vital hub for the renewable energy sector, and surely the Minister must recognise that if we are to further develop the area, direct services to through to King's Cross are an absolutely vital link. The proposals are supported by the Chamber of Commerce by large businesses such as Phillips 66, and I can only urge the Minister to get on with it. Give the okay. Under the new structure, he will be able to do that just by a signature.

Get on with it.

16:41

Andrew Ranger MP (Wrexham, Labour)

- -

Yeah, yeah. Well. >> Andrew Ranger. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I welcome the clear ambition for our railways and therefore for our our railways and therefore for our nation that the Railways Bill brings. Rail is something that runs in my family's blood. My late grandad worked on the railways, first for Lmwh and then British Rail and Crewe, one of the homes of rail and where I spent the early part of my childhood. As someone whose constituency sits on the board of North Wales and England, our train services are vital for many people across Wrexham.

But for too long, as has been said already, they simply have to accept that cancellations, delays and poor value for their money are just part of the deal. That is why it is right that this Labour government is already following the Welsh Labour Government and taking our train services back into public ownership because we must be honest, privatisation, privatisation has failed its users and they should not have to put up with the too often substantial service and ever increasing prices for any longer.

It is important that, regardless of who oversees our railways, the passenger experience remains the number one priority. And therefore it is right that this bill brings forward a simplified and unified ticket system, as we have heard already. And alongside this, the recently announced freezing rail fares for the first time in 30 years. Likewise, the creation of the new Passenger Watchdog will ensure that Great British Rail will be held accountable in a way that private services never truly have been.

A truly independent body, an organisation that will ensure standards are met. The Passenger Watchdog will be able to investigate disputes, demand data and get them resolved, and also the changes to the decision making process around track usage and infrastructure will move us away from a system that prioritises profits over passenger experience, with track access based on demand and social value, not just revenue and profits. Timetables designed in one place so different operators stop working at cross purpose investment and engineering work coordinated to minimise disruption.

Clear accountability when services fail, putting a stop to cases where popular routes are routinely packed or often not even able to be boarded. My constituency, Wrexham, is a clear case study in the complexity of the current system. Sitting within the EU cross-border functional economy, where key rail assets for the rail network serving the local economy sit in both England and Wales. Just as station is the gateway to North Wales, sitting on the junction of the North Wales Coast Main Line and the Marches Line, and Chester is key for North Wales and Wrexham for access to places like Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham, London, multiple airports.

Yet the Mersey economy is served by multiple Network region, Network Rail regions and train operators, all with competing interests, and the cross-party growth track 360 group campaigns for rail investment to improve economic growth and productivity. So we welcome the investment in the Page Wood Siding that will enable direct services between Wrexham and Liverpool. Meanwhile, a new station at Deeside will improve access from Wrexham in north Wales to the many jobs on the Deeside industrial Estate, and that emphasis on integration and partnership working will help simplify the system and improve accountability and improving the transparency of decision making.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

give. Way I will. I thank my hon. Friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. He's giving a very interesting speech in my constituency. Chalkwell station has been waiting an age for access for been waiting an age for access for all works to take place, which is now taking place. Both my train lines are now in public ownership lines are now in public ownership and they're working closely with Network Rail. So does he agree with me that this integration is going me that this integration is going to make this so much easier moving forward, quicker and slicker and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

easier for these projects to get going in the benefit of the commuters. Andrew Ranger.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Andrew Ranger. I thank you, my friend, for that intervention and I completely agree with that. It's going to be crucial to improving services for everybody as well. We have a renewed deal for Welsh customers as well. The Welsh customers as well. The inclusion of a memorandum of understanding means that there will be a shared understanding and shared objectives across funding, shared objectives across funding, access and track integration and, crucially, for Wrexham and aligned cross-border framework for governance and funding, reflecting how crucial these services are to our local communities, economies and their ability to succeed.

And alongside this, I'm delighted that there will be a dedicated business unit within Great British Rail that is both obligated and empowered to work with transport for Wales to deliver the best possible offering. This shows that it doesn't need to be an either or when it comes to working relationships with partners, with the right structures and the shared ambition we are already seeing in Wales, we've got two thirds of journeys now on brand new trains, a 20% rise in passenger journeys and the plan for Network North Wales delivering outcomes that genuinely put passengers first.

And the legislation captures the full spirit of devolution, as we've already heard. It recognises not only devolved governments but mayoral authorities as well, and the duty to consult on the major decisions give local leaders the ability to shape what they know, where it's best for their areas. Building on that success, we've already seen through things like the network and bus franchising in the Midlands and Merseytravel, and that step closer to a fully integrated transport system across the country. And finally, I'd just like to reflect on the wider implications of what good rail means, particularly for our young people.

It means opportunity and the chance for them to access experiences and chances at broaden horizons and career prospects that go on to make a huge difference in their lives and outcomes. So I look forward to following the bill as it progresses through the House and delivering for our constituents here.

16:47

Sarah Dyke MP (Glastonbury and Somerton, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Sarah speaker. >> It's a pleasure to speak in this debate. In the 1800s, Britain's railways unlocked growth and opportunity across the country and opportunity across the country and a huge network grew until the Beeching cuts closed roughly a third of the network in the 1960s. third of the network in the 1960s. As a result, many rural communities lost their rail links, forcing reliance on buses and private cars, creating transport deserts. Madam Deputy Speaker, my constituency is home to only two railway stations, Templecombe in the south and Castle Cary in the east.

This means many towns and villages are left unconnected to the two railway lines that run through the constituency. Langport had two railway stations, while Somerset Somerton had its own station until the Beeching cuts, but like many rural towns, they have simply lost connectivity. But Glastonbury and Street are the two largest towns in the constituency, are both completely unconnected to the railway. There isn't even a direct or an integrated bus service available from Glastonbury to connect to the railway station.

Of course, I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Be giving way, she talks of accessibility. We cannot forget, of course, disabled people in that if I might share a perverse peculiarity in Bradley Station near Oxford, considered a rural station, disabled people can go northbound disabled people can go northbound but not southbound because there isn't step free access on it. How

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ridiculous is that? And is this bill not an opportunity to address some of those discrepancies? I entirely agree with my hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. It's absolutely essential that lifts are provided at train stations to provide that step free access for people with mobility issues, pushchairs or luggage. Indeed. Madam Deputy Chair, Castle Cary Station is the official station of the Glastonbury Festival, so this could also include camping gear and tents. Wet weather gear plenty of it, usually during Glastonbury Festival, but the Railways Bill must not just manage decline. Deputy chair and speaker. It must also restore connectivity and patronage as well.

That means auditing underserved communities and delivering integrated rail and public transport links where they have been lost. The Langport Transport Group have run a campaign to bring back a railway station to the area and put forward a strategic business outline case to the government. In February 2022. This was met with Tory inaction for nearly three years, and then S&D storing your railway fund was dropped by this government, so the fund needed improving, not removing. Madam Deputy Speaker, the government have claimed that GBR will be responsive to both national and local ambitions.

While long term rail strategy aims to reduce regional and national inequality as one of its priorities. But more than half of small towns in the south southwest are now transport deserts, and the campaign for Better Transport Research shows that in Somerset, 114 out of 23 towns no longer have adequate public transport. More and more planning applications are being approved in South Somerset, so it's essential that GBR can expand the rail network to accommodate future growth and ensure rural communities are not left behind.

Now, I am pleased that the Liberal Democrat run Somerset Council has committed to develop further plans to make the case for a new station in the Somerton and Langport area, as well as improving access and integration with the existing network. But the long term rail strategy could include a network expansion plan that covers increased extent of the network. A new and upgraded station should align with local transport and growth plans. I also believe the long term rail strategy should focus on how to boost access to railway stations when local people cannot access them on in their own town.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the government pledged to release their integrated National Transport Strategy this year, but there's still no sight of it. There is an opportunity, therefore, to link the strategy with GBR to deliver truly integrated and accessible transport for people in rural areas, because rural areas should not be excluded from this opportunity any more, and there is absolutely no reason why they should be either.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah. So I also want to touch on some

**** Possible New Speaker ****

So I also want to touch on some of the issues around soil moisture deficit, which has been a huge deficit, which has been a huge problem on some of the tracks in the West this year, but I will probably leave that for for another probably leave that for for another time. So, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will wait to see how this legislation will deliver for legislation will deliver for constituents in Glastonbury and Somerton who have been left unconnected for far too long with an unreliable and infrequent service.

And I will also look forward to scrutinising this bill as it progresses through the House, and I am determined to ensure that it delivers for my constituents in Glastonbury and Somerton.

16:53

Mrs Elsie Blundell MP (Heywood and Middleton North, Labour)

- -

Yeah, LC Blundell. >> Yeah, LC Blundell. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The Railways Bill before the House today will be vital to delivering on this government's promise to on this government's promise to revive our country's railways and redefine what passengers should expect from their rail services. It is beyond doubt that the privatisation of the rail network has completely failed, and it is now the task of this Labour government to rebuild the confidence that has been lost. That is why I wholly welcome the establishment of Great British Railways, which will deliver coherence where there has been chaos and a sense of strategic direction, where there has been lethargy.

The best place for our country's rail network is in the hands of the public. And alongside a strengthened Passenger Watchdog, a new access regime and an enhanced role for our devolved authorities. I believe that GBR will show passengers that what has been previously is no longer the way it has to be, and it is on the final point, the role of Maya Ellis strategic authorities that I want to focus my remarks today. This bill is the obvious next step in advancing the devolution agenda by this government and elected mayors.

I am proud of our accomplishments in Greater Manchester in this space. Having already brought buses back under local control and built the UK's ever largest ever light rail network, the next step is for us to bring local rail services into the B network where they belong. It is therefore crucial that this bill is fully utilised, and we explicitly formalise ties between strategic authorities, national government and GBR. I believe that there are three areas where we can and must provide our strategic authorities with more certainty through this landmark piece of legislation.

First, we should consider the benefits of requiring GBR to go further than consulting with our authorities. If we are to truly give local people and their transport authorities a key role in shaping their own rail networks, we must recognise the merits of establishing a clear statutory role for mayors in commissioning rail services to, and ensuring that those leading GBR are plugged in to the needs of our regions. This means utilising the talents and knowledge of those that make up our local transport authorities, and I would like to express my sincere thanks to Laura Shaw for her work across Shadow GBR in that regard, and I do hope that her role is a sign that GBR will continue to draw on these exceptional regional leaders.

Secondly, we must address questions around funding certainty for our authorities and ltas. We should ensure that GBR develops key functions such as financial planning in tandem with our mayoral authorities. By forging partnerships between GBR and our mayors on funding, I believe that we will see greater value for money in the long term, a return on investment and a sustained increase in passengers confidence in the rail network. This could be done by agreeing statutory limits on mid period funding reductions and working to align enhancement pipelines, planning horizons and industry funding cycles.

Thirdly, Madam Deputy Speaker, I believe that the measures in this bill must ensure duties on GBR to align their decision making with priorities of local transport plans. These plans,

16:57

Rt Hon Wendy Morton MP (Aldridge-Brownhills, Conservative)

- -

like the Greater Manchester Transport Strategy 2040, have a statutory basis and provide a long term view of what it will take for rail to play a transformative and integrated role in our communities. integrated role in our communities. I look forward to watching this bill progress and to further consideration being given to how GBR will work with our elected GBR will work with our elected mayors and local transport authorities. In closing, Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill Deputy Speaker, this bill encapsulates the ambition of this Labour government to undo a legacy of neglect that has left our rail network fractured and public trust eroded.

Only this party is serious about tackling the deep rooted challenges facing track and train, and now the onus is on us to ensure that GBR succeeds where successive governments and arm's length bodies have failed to get this right, Great British Rail must be aligned with the priorities of local people and those they elect to ensure that, once again, rail is a driver of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

opportunity rather than a cap on ambition. A Wendy Morton Deputy Speaker Great British Rail is not an Great British Rail is not an entirely new concept, but what this government presents as a modernisation of our railways is modernisation of our railways is when you strip away the glossy language, a centralising piece of legislation that advances Labour's legislation that advances Labour's drive towards nationalisation, it risks creating a structure that is risks creating a structure that is powerful, sprawling and unaccountable in relation to Aldridge.

In my constituency we had secured funding to deliver a railway station under the former mayor, Andy Street, but residents and residents were told after decades of waiting, the project would finally go ahead. But the new Labour mayor chose to withdraw the funding in favour of his own pet projects. Now, when questions are put to Ministers, every answer points back to the combined authority with the vague suggestion that if the region chooses it well, Aldridge and the Wmca did choose. The funding was in place, but Labour removed it.

Nothing in this bill prevents such a unilateral political decision being made. Again, it gives no guarantee of transparency, no duty to consult affected communities. Madam Deputy Speaker I'm very aware, as a former rail Minister, that we on this side have long recognised that the old model needed updating. That's why in government we began the work of Great British Railways through the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail may laugh, but we set out the case for bringing track and train closer together, improving accountability and delivering a more unified, passenger focussed system.

We recognise the need for renewal of our railways grounded in practicality, not in politics, but what we have in front of us today is, oh no, it's something very different. This bill offers two little detail, two little accountability, and far too many unanswered questions. It replaces a pragmatic, balanced approach with an ideological blueprint for nationalisation. Passengers across the country deserve better. The bill promises integration, but it delivers centralisation. It speaks of clarity, yet it blurs responsibilities. Great British Railways will control timetables, fares, access decisions, infrastructure, planning and data a concentration of authority that should concern anyone who believes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in genuine public accountability. Of course. I thank my hon. Friend for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for giving away. The East Coast Main Line has been a fantastic example of where privatisation has worked, because open access operators like because open access operators like Hull Trains, Lumo and Grand Central are competing with the franchisee there, keeping prices down and there, keeping prices down and they're keeping service levels up. Would you agree with me that this bill does nothing to protect those open access operators? And a real danger that this centralised, Soviet style monolith will squeeze

**** Possible New Speaker ****

honourable. My hon. Friend is absolutely right. And what is actually worse right. And what is actually worse is that time after time, I cannot get a straight answer out of the Ministers on the benches opposite as to whether they will support as to whether they will support open access or not. Now, at the same time, this bill weakens the same time, this bill weakens the independence of the ORR and when when a body that runs services is also shaping the rules under which also shaping the rules under which those services are judged.

Again, this House should be deeply concerned. This bill puts competition and innovation at risk alongside, as my hon. Friend has highlighted, the future of open access, which is incredibly uncertain. A railway that cannot accommodate competition is a railway destined to stagnate. And there's also the unresolved question of how GBR will interact with the Department for transport. The bill creates overlapping duties that risk friction and confusion. GBR will be required to consult, to produce strategies and to respond to ministerial direction.

Yet its operational independence is undefined. So I'd like to ask the Minister, will political priorities override operational judgement? Will GBR operate as an arm's length body or as an extension of the department? And how will we as elected members hold Great British Rail and Ministers and mayors to account? Because under this bill, local decision making is not stronger. Ministers may talk the talk about devolution, but the bill provides little evidence of it, requiring GBR merely to have regard to local transport plans is a notably weak obligation.

It does not require GBR to follow them. It offers no protection to communities such as Aldridge, where projects risk being simply cast aside when the political wind changes. If the government is serious about devolving power to local leaders, they must allow us, the elected members, to hold them to account. Madam Deputy Speaker, this House should not mistake this railway reorganisation for for renewal. Far from it. It simply rearranges structures without failing to address the issues that matter most to passengers.

Cancelled trains, inconsistent performance, reduced competition and decisions made far away from the communities this that they affect. This is a bill that gives Labour more control, not passengers, better railways. It's not a credible plan for the future of our railways and the government should think again.

17:02

Cat Eccles MP (Stourbridge, Labour)

- -

Cat Eccles thank you, Madam supporter. >> And rail workers, I'm proud to be speaking on a key manifesto commitment of this Labour government. This bill is about government. This bill is about putting passengers, workers and the national interest back at the heart of our railways. For too long, a fragmented model has left the public with a patchwork quilt of competing interests, tracks separated from train timetables misaligned and confusing incentives. Great British Railways offers a once in a generation opportunity to stitch the network back together.

A single, publicly owned guiding mind with a 30 year horizon, stability and planning, and clarity and purpose. In 2023, I organised the country's biggest Save the Ticket Office campaign to save the ticket office at Stourbridge Junction, alongside local rail users and Stourbridge's favourite feline, George Station cats. I heard first hand how much our communities value and accessible staffed railway passengers are not abstractions, they are our neighbours, carers, shift workers, pensioners. They expect and deserve service, safety and support.

The bill's promise will only be realised by the people who deliver it. Our railway workers, our drivers, guards, signallers, engineers, station teams and cleaners. They are not a cost to be cut, they are an asset to be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

invested in and I, I will happily give way. Can I just declare my register of interest as chair of the parliamentary group? There's no reference in the bill at the moment to staffing at all who will be to staffing at all who will be their employer? What will happen in their pensions, whether TPP will apply on transfer itself, or whether their existing benefits whether their existing benefits will apply, or whether there'll be a mandate that levels of staffing on stations and elsewhere.

It's an on stations and elsewhere. It's an agenda for constructive engagement with the government. Does she agree that it's important the Minister gives that commitment when he winds

**** Possible New Speaker ****

up today? Yes. I thank my right hon. Friend for his valuable intervention. He makes his valuable intervention. He makes a really important point that there is currently no mention of staff in the bill. And as I've said, there the bill. And as I've said, there will be no Great British Railways without those staff and without all the protections that they need and the protections that they need and ensure assurances they need going forward. So I welcome the move to forward.

So I welcome the move to bring track and train together, but we must also bring the workforce together with clear pathways on employment, pensions, facilities and a strong voice for staff and their unions in governance. And when passengers say they want confidence and care on the network, what they are asking for is people present, trained and empowered. So let us ensure that the transition to GBR provides clarity and security for staff, underwrites safe staffing levels on trains and at stations, and ends the false economy of fragmented outsourcing that undermines both service quality and value for money.

And Madam Deputy Speaker, let's not forget that nothing moves without logistics and rail freight is the backbone of that system. Moving goods predictably and efficiently with around three quarters fewer emissions per tonne kilometre than road. The bill's statutory freight growth target is the right signal, but that signal must be backed up with a firm plan. We need safeguards so that GBR capacity duty does not allow passenger services to squeeze freight off the network, and that means transparency, fair charging and protection of strategic freight corridors and to unlock genuinely transformative growth, we must match governance with infrastructure.

We need targeted electrification, including infill schemes on freight critical routes, which will cut costs, carbon and journey times. In some corridors, dozens of miles of electrification has already unlocked thousands of net kilometres kilometres of cleaner freight every single day, and each additional electrically hauled train is congestion avoided, carbon reduced and reliability improved. And put simply, the freight target and electrification must work together. Now. For more than three decades, the leasing model has extracted hundreds of millions from railway in dividends and charges money that could and should be reinvested in the front line.

And if we believe in long term public stewardship, we should procure rolling stock directly where it delivers better value. Using public finance to reduce lifetime costs, standardised fleets and support the UK supply chain. And let's be ambitious about green technologies. Electric traction is gold standard battery and hydrogen can play targeted roles. GBR should set a whole system rolling stock strategy, which is modern, modular and interoperable as well as cleaner. So when we renew fleets, we we do so with purpose rather than piecemeal leasing at a premium.

Open access has sometimes brought welcome competition, but is also cherry picked the most profitable flows, complicating timetables and undermining network planning. And in an integrated system, capacity should be allocated to maximise public value, not private extraction. Now to conclude, Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill is about integration, not ideology service, not shareholder return back to our long term strategy. Safeguards for freight a workforce treated as an asset and a modern plan for electrification and building a railway that is cleaner, simpler, fairer and proudly public.

If we do

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that, we will deliver a railway for Britain we can rely on. Be proud of Edward Morello Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm looking.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm looking. Forward to. Sitting on the Bill committee, serving on the bill committee, because this bill is a long awaited because this bill is a long awaited opportunity to reshape our rail network for the better. An opportunity to deliver real value, opportunity to deliver real value, reliability and affordability for passengers across the whole of the country, but especially in underserved rural communities like underserved rural communities like West Dorset. I welcome key provisions like the commitment to long term strategy, a more integrated approach to track and train, the retention of important regulatory role of the ORR, a

17:08

Edward Morello MP (West Dorset, Liberal Democrat)

- -

strong focus on accessibility, the ambition to simplify a fragmented structure that is too long and too structure that is too long and too often pushed infrastructure and operations in different directions. My constituents repeatedly tell me that what they want is reliability and affordability above all, which is why we also welcome the freeze is why we also welcome the freeze on rail fares long campaigned for by the Liberal Democrats that was announced in the Budget West Dorset announced in the Budget West Dorset rural rail network, including the Salisbury to Exeter line, is crucial for our communities.

Yet its infrastructure remains outdated and fragile. The recommendations of the Connecting Southwest England report are clear electrification, upgrading single track sections. Additional passing points, such as the much needed Tisbury Loop, would dramatically improve reliability and capacity and reduce delays that plague the line today. Too often, rural lines are left with old, uncomfortable and unreliable trains.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of course I will. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way. You talk about unreliable service. I have the unreliable service. I have the Thameslink and London Northwestern. I have Doreen, who's in her 80s, talked about cancellation after cancellation in the mid 80s. She cancellation in the mid 80s. She had to wait till past midnight. There's Katie, there's others. But for that, for those cancelled for that, for those cancelled service, the value is awful. They have to pay £30 for a 30 minute return journey.

Would my right hon. return journey. Would my right hon. Friend agree with me that we need to have a. We need to know from the government what mechanisms there are to hold operators accountable, to make sure that passengers get the service that they pay for.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I 100% agree, and I very much hope that this bill will give us the opportunity to improve the levels of service that she's levels of service that she's talking about. End of the line. Stopping services should not be defined by graffiti, broken heating, limited seating and high fares. limited seating and high fares. What we want is modern trains with reliable wifi, working toilets, clear visual and audio information systems for disabled passengers and self safe well lit stations. Madam self safe well lit stations.

Madam Deputy Speaker, if this bill delivers anything, I hope it will deliver the return of the buffet trolley on rail journeys lasting over an hour, a guaranteed minimum level of food and drink provision should be a basic expectation of modern public transport, whether it is a parent travelling with children, an older passenger managing a long trip, commuters trying to work on the move, or maybe a member of parliament hoping for a gin and tonic on the way home. Access to refreshments are important.

I would also like to see this this GB rail Bill support our climate commitments. That means accelerating electrification, expanding battery and hydrogen use where appropriate, setting clear standards for freight and passenger emissions. A long term rail strategy must be transparent, regularly reviewed, subject to parliamentary scrutiny and designed with future climate pressures in mind, including the modelling of environmental impacts such as the soil moisture deficit that is severely disrupted services in Dorset and has already been mentioned in this House. However, there are elements of this bill that cause concern.

Many will rightly question whether Great British Railways is, as it is currently proposed, risk becoming another rail version of NHS England, a large centralised body with limited agility, limited parliamentary accountability and simply an opportunity for ministerial micromanagement. If the Secretary of State wants more power, accountability to Parliament must also increase alongside it. Passengers deserve clear, measurable outcomes on affordability, reliability and accessibility, not vague commitments that cannot be scrutinised. We need to be able to get answers and get change for our constituents.

If standards fall below acceptable levels and not have to deal with arm length bodies. Passengers should also be protected from excessive charges and hidden fees. The GB rail app and website should never add unnecessary booking fees or administrative costs. Instead, we should push for open source fare systems that allow passengers to easily find the best deal expanding discount schemes, especially for young people through rail mile systems, would help more people travel further and reduce costs for families. Finally, this bill must lead to a railway way back.

Office systems A rationalised data is used to improve passenger experience, and long term planning is not sacrificed for short term crisis management. Passengers passengers deserve honesty about upcoming delays, clarity on long term upgrades, and confidence that today's problems are not simply passed on to tomorrow's Parliament. This is a once in a generation opportunity to deliver a railway that works for commuters, for rural communities, for disabled passengers, for young people seeking opportunity, and of course, for the climate. I look forward to working with Ministers and colleagues from across the House on the Bill Committee to strengthen this legislation and deliver a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

railway worthy of the people that we serve here. Rebecca Long-Bailey.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Deputy speaker, I refer to my register of interests, and I also want to thank the Secretary and the hon. Members for Sheffield Heeley and Middlesbrough and Thornaby East for all of their hard work in getting us to this point today. I getting us to this point today. I also want to recognise the thousands of rail staff who keep our network moving every single day. Their skill, dedication and professionalism were impossible to miss during the pandemic and once again during the recent tragedy in Huntington, when workers ran towards danger to protect others.

17:13

Rebecca Long Bailey MP (Salford, Labour)

- -

So if we're serious about creating a world class rail system, then a world class rail system, then these workers have got to be at the centre of it. And a unified, publicly owned railway will be publicly owned railway will be simpler, safer and more efficient, and it will reverse the legacy of and it will reverse the legacy of privatisation, which carved up the industry and prioritised shared dividends over people and service dividends over people and service quality. So this bill is great, but I do have some fundamental issues that need to be ironed out as this bill makes its way through the House.

If Great British Railways is genuinely being built from dozens of separate organisations, then we need a clear description of its structure and we need clarity on who will actually employ all of the people who keep our railways running. More than 100,000 workers are currently employed by Network Rail and the train operating companies. Tens of thousands more are outsourced to security firms, cleaning contractors, catering companies and agencies supplying infrastructure labour, many of them on insecure zero hour terms. All together, well over 150,000 people form Britain's rail workforce.

Yet, sadly, today those workers can't tell you who their future employer will be, what happens to their pensions or how they might transfer into the new organisation. So we've got to recognise that whilst today is a great day, this uncertainty is not fair for them and it undermines the stability and confidence the new system needs from day one. We also need to see some detail around how workers and their unions will have a voice. Other public transport bodies. Transport for London.

Transport Scotland Transport for Wales have built in mechanisms for staff representation on their boards, but Great British Railways has drafted doesn't have any such routes. If you want an organisation that benefits from the insights and expertise of the people who actually operate it, this has to be put in the bill and we must be honest. The pressures that fell on the workforce over 30 years of privatisation have left deep scars. We saw repeated attempts to hollow out staffing. Driver only operation Derby South staffed stations, ticket office closures, aggressive outsourcing and the downgrading of essential roles.

The Government's Getting Britain Moving promised to turn the page. Recognising staff as an asset, not a cost, and pledging to make GBR a single employer people would be proud to join. That vision was right, but it can't be delivered. If we keep the workforce scattered across a maze of private providers. And if GBR is to inherit the contracts of Network Rail and the train operating companies, we shouldn't simply carry forward decades of outsourcing, cleaning, security, station staffing, catering and maintenance are vital parts of the railway.

Bringing them back in-house is not radical. It's already happening across parts of Scotland and Wales, where In-sourcing has improved accountability and service quality, and removing the web of contracts would cut costs of the work that was created by privatisation. So, in the spirit of constructive partnership, I'd welcome the Secretary adopting the Rail Maritime Union sensible and pragmatic proposals on these issues. They strengthen the bill and they'd help deliver the railway that we all want to see. Thank you.

17:17

Josh Babarinde MP (Eastbourne, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Josh Babarinde. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The arrival of the railway to The arrival of the railway to Eastbourne in 1849 helped the seventh Duke of Devonshire, who helped to build the town and was the architect of Eastbourne, translate his plans into a reality. And Eastbourne therefore became the resort that people across the town know and love. The sunniest town in the UK, the largest Marina in Northern Europe, and some may know Eastbourne hosts one of the busiest level crossings in Europe, Hampden Park at level crossing my home patch.

And while I love my home patch to bits Hampden Park level crossing, which sees an average of the gates shut down for trains to pass every four minutes, is the bane of Hampden Parkers lives in so many respects, Bane that we hope to be addressed in part by this bill. While the railways have made Eastbourne, the level crossing in Hampden Park literally breaks Eastbourne, you cannot cross from one part of town to another for so much of the day as a result of that crossing.

And in fact, a local resident called James Re, who's a software engineer, has created a website called Are the Gates Up, specifically dedicated to the Hampden Park level crossing to help residents? I can see lots of members googling other gates up. Com or not listening to my speech. That's the one. And we very much hope that this bill and the investment that it could bring to Eastbourne to help address the issue with Hampden Park level crossing, could preclude the need for James's website all together.

But another, slightly more serious issue is the issue of access. Again, when it comes to Hampden Park station in my constituency, there is no step free access from one platform to another, which means that folks who have mobility needs, folks who have buggies or folks who have luggage, not the wet weather luggage that my hon. Friend for Glastonbury and Somerton referred to. It does not rain in Eastbourne, but instead the enormous parasols that people would seek to take from platform one to platform two could be much more ably transported if we had the dedicated access for all scheme that helped to invest in accessibility in our train station, and the bill does not go far enough.

Of course, the Passenger Watchdog will have the ability to set certain regulations when it comes to accessibility, but there is no statutory requirement for such accessibility, and the bill needs to be strengthened in that respect. And I very much hope that the bill will give passengers, whether commuters or tourists and others, the opportunity to input into how the future of rail services are shaped going forward. I'm delighted to have led a campaign to restore the direct train from Eastbourne to London Bridge and back, which launches next Monday, thanks to great folks like Christina Ewbank and Dave Cooper and local businesses getting on board, and many people who signed our petition.

But it should not be like pulling teeth to get such an obvious service reinstated. And so I hope that the Minister will ensure that the likes of Eastbourne and elsewhere can get back on track by having the opportunity to input into the future of rail across the country.

17:21

Julia Buckley MP (Shrewsbury, Labour)

- -

For Julia Buckley. >> For Julia Buckley. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I'm surely the luckiest. MP in this House, as I represent the this House, as I represent the charming, thriving border town of Shrewsbury. Our strategic location serves as a hub for Shropshire on the edge of industrial West Midlands. But as the gateway to Wales and our railway offers a major transport transit point for Welsh services operated by transport for Wales with 2.2 million passengers, I'm told, with a second busiest station in Wales, and there is so much latent demand for more services.

However, under privatisation we have been on the edge of other people's maps for too long. We're the last stop on the West Midlands line and the last major station from Wales, and it's held back. Our investment limited. Our inter-city services such as the much missed direct train to London. And while our railway station is a beautiful grade two listed building with a fabulous team of staff led by the wonderful, long serving manager Shelley Hall, we need our station to be more than a museum piece.

In order to increase services, we must first have our master plan to bring together infrastructure upgrades. And today's railway Bill provides a once in a generation opportunity under Great British Railways to enable Shrewsbury station to fulfil its true potential. We have such latent demand for additional services that when our local TfW upgraded our service into Birmingham, it used to have two carriages with 81 people standing. They gave us four carriages and overnight ticket sales went up by 18%. Imagine how many more tickets we could sell for more passengers at Shrewsbury.

When a nationalised service joins up routes and opens up opportunities for my residents. But we may have 2.2 million existing passengers at Shrewsbury. But I'm keen to support a new breed the wannabe passengers, those who want to make the modal shift out of cars and onto our rail network, those who need to travel for work, study or leisure, but for whom there are no seats or services yet they need earlier, later, more frequent trains. And in Shropshire, we still dream of that direct train to London to reconnect us to the capital.

Research shows it will add £9 million a year to our local economy. And it's not just me who thinks Shrewsbury's rail investment could unlock Bountiful economic growth. I was delighted yesterday to see the Midlands Connect's report for DfT. Looking at the Wolverhampton to Shrewsbury corridor for growth, showing that connectivity between the two centres will boost regional economy, benefit productivity and support employment sectors. This corridor currently supports major employers such as the I54 Enterprise Zone, the Battlefield Business Park, Shrewsbury Business Park and future developments in Shifnal and Telford.

These sites alone support over 4000 jobs and we need that improved access to rail, bus and active travel. But enhancing that transport corridor will also deliver benefits for Wales because of the cross-border gateway and the freight connections between our two nations, and growth in this area aligns with the priorities over the border. We saw in the Budget. The Chancellor commit to £445 million investment over the next ten years, specifically to support transport infrastructure in Wales, highlighting the importance of that major investment of cross-border rail activity as the major border rail hub between an already nationalised transport for Wales and a soon to be nationalised West Midlands Railways, Shrewsbury offers the strategic link, ensuring the success of GBR only when our regions and devolved nations can co-deliver two nationalised rail systems seamlessly.

For passengers at hubs like mine will, we have succeeded? The Great British Railways Bill was written to improve services in places like Shrewsbury and Shrewsbury, has been waiting for the Great British Railways, not least my wannabe passengers, who are still hoping it will unlock their employment and economic opportunity. So once again, Shrewsbury will become the beating heart of our reinvigorated railway.

17:25

Monica Harding MP (Esher and Walton, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Monica Harding. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The experience of. My constituents. Alicia Morton, served by South Western Railway, served by South Western Railway, the first of the train operators to be taken into public ownership, is not that nationalisation guarantees not that nationalisation guarantees a better experience. This autumn feels as bad as the last. I feel it here, on my way or not, into this place, and I have a sack load full of constituent complaints about delays and cancellations. In Esher station, 30% of trains have been delayed last month.

Only yesterday, a constituent told me that he was forced to spend £60 on taxis and two hours of extra childcare because of a train cancellation, something that is too frequently experienced by us. And Wharton School children are missing hours of school because their trains consistently are delayed and they miss their connections on the 16th, 17th, 20th, 23rd of October on the seventh, 10th, 12th, 13th, 18th, 19th and 24th of November, their trains were delayed. 278 students were affected.

I understand the underinvestment, the lack of accountability and frankly, the shameful mess the conservative government left to this government to sort out by. I urge the Minister in this bill to go further and faster on reform to ensure that this bill is not a continuation of this disappointment as this bill receives its Second Reading. I want to make the case for Hersham Station, a station that is long overdue for improvement. And another shameful example of the neglect of our railways and lack of accountability.

Hersham sits on the South West Main line in my constituency, a constituency that contributes more to the Exchequer than any other outside of London. These people are using the station every day, commuting into London and creating the growth that our country needs. Yet despite being used over 600,000 times a year, Hersham Station is an eyesore, ramshackle and rundown. There is nothing that tells these commuters to go and get growth. That is a national mission. Nothing to suggest any ambition as a country, or that we are on the sharp end of innovation or technology efficiency and delivery.

The only message they get from the station is that the government and train operator doesn't have either the desire or the ambition to get you to work on time. At Hersham, the stairs up to the platform are crumbling, with visible holes exposing long drops below. They shake underfoot. Needless to say, there is no step free access. The roof is exposed corrugated iron. Both platforms were built in the 1960s, using materials only meant for temporary use. When groups of schoolchildren step off the train and walk down that platform, you can feel it shaking underfoot.

Yes, last year, Madam Deputy Speaker someone put their foot straight through the platform and it shook, shaking the managing director of Southwest Rail down to fix the that hole. So should I give up hope on a complete refurbishment that the whole state of my constituency in Hersham, who have put up with this too long? Clauses 46 and 47 give us, for the first time in decades, a national centralised mechanism to say this is not good enough and it must be fixed. But Madam Deputy Speaker, as drafted, these clauses do not yet go far enough.

For decades, this oversight existed through the design of the British Railways Board, which the government used to raise the standard of design across British nationalised railway system from the 1950s. That system disappeared with privatisation. Since then, station design has been neglected and passengers have paid the price with exactly the same kind of delay we now see at Hersham. So I would like to see clause 46 strengthened by amendments, so that minimum station standards must explicitly include design quality, accessibility, durability and engagement with the community and clear time limits for fixing safety and accessibility related defects.

So I ask the Minister to look at this carefully to provide the funding, the resource and the ambition to give Hersham Station what it so desperately needs.

17:29

Grahame Morris MP (Easington, Labour)

- -

A Grahame Morris. >> To my. >> Entry in the Register of Members Interests and declare an interest Interests and declare an interest as vice chair of the RMT parliamentary group. I'm delighted in particular to follow my good friends, the members for Salford in Stourbridge. Now I want to make some similar points. I do hope the Ministers on the frontbench will address these, either in their closing statements or perhaps in committee. I must declare that I'm delighted that this Labour Government has placed the transformation of our railways, bringing back track and train together at the forefront of its agenda for change.

I want to mention four points workforce, ROSCOs, rail, freight and track capacity and firstly in relation to the workforce. As colleagues have said, our railway workers are the backbone of the industry. They drive the trains, maintain the tracks, keep the stations and carriages clean. So 150,000 rail workers keep the network running smoothly and safely every single day. And I wonder if the Minister, if my hon. Friend, could provide greater clarity on the intended structure of GBR and shed some light on why the bill at this time makes no reference to the employment of rail rail staff, as this is causing great uncertainty amongst the workforce.

I also want to refer to concerns raised by the PCs trade union regarding 225 of their members at the Department for transport, who were due to be transferred to the subsidiary company, Department for Transport Operator Limited by the 31st of March 2026. Coincidentally, the target date for departmental headcount reductions. In addition to the risk of job losses and the consequential, consequential loss of experience and expertise which could hamper delivery of the rail reforms, these staff will lose their civil service status and may well face poor terms and conditions.

The funding arrangements for the new company is still unclear, and this transfer appears to run counter to Labour's commitment to the bigger way. The biggest wave of insourcing in generation insourcing and ensuring that workers are kept in health house cutting out private sector profiteering is a great aim to achieve and the bill is a step towards that. Personally, Madam speaker, as part of this bill, I would also like to see the government look more closely at how we completely cut out profiteering entirely from the railways and look at how we can procure our own rolling stock to make changes to to end excessive profiteering by rolling stock companies or ROSCOs, I think, would really be sensible if GBR could establish its own rolling stock company and ordering and owning its own rolling stock, taking advantage of low government borrowing rates.

That's what we should be striving for. And in the short term, the RMT is calling for profits a profits levy on the ROSCOs, a 50% levy on pre-tax profits that would raise 116 million a year, 116 million a year in funds that could be used for much needed upgrades on rail freight. I want to highlight that rail freight and the enormous opportunity it gives often overlooked, particularly in my own constituency and my constituency have seen has direct rail access to the Port of Seaham and it's ideally placed to seek efficient, reliable routes to move goods in and out, in and out of the region.

We've only got one freight train a week coming in to see him. I therefore welcome that this bill would require the Secretary of State to set a target for rail freight growth, and will place duties on GBR Ministers and the OBR to promote it. However, a single dedicated rail freight freight business unit operating within GBR and working with the rail freight businesses would be an even more effective driver of long term growth. Integrated with, rather than competing with, the passenger railway, and I hope the state will examine the benefits of such an approach.

17:33

David Chadwick MP (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, Liberal Democrat)

- -

David Chadwick. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, let me be very clear from the outset that this bill fails Wales. outset that this bill fails Wales. Last year, Wales voted decisively for change, and this is just another example of how that change another example of how that change will not be coming. This bill fails my constituents in Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe, who rely on some of the most neglected rail lines anywhere in the United Kingdom. For years, the people I represent have endured cancellations, painfully slow journeys, ageing trains and stations that would embarrass any modern transport system.

The Marches line still runs on signalling technology that belongs in a museum. The Heart of Wales line, a lifeline for rural communities, has been crying out for meaningful investment for over a decade. And what does this bill do to fix any of that? Nothing. Instead, it centralises even more power here in Whitehall and offers Wales nothing more than a pat on the head and the promise of consultation. Consultation is what Wales has had plenty of for the last 30 years, and look where it's got us.

But the real injustice here is this Scotland gets real power over its railways and Wales gets nothing. No power of direction, no power over infrastructure, no power over funding. Not even a guarantee that Welsh needs will be taken seriously. This government has gone out of its way to give Scotland the meaningful authority. And yet Wales, a nation with its own parliament and its own transport strategy, is told to make do with a memorandum of understanding, a document with no legal force, no accountability and no guarantee of action.

And this inequality has real world consequences, Madam Deputy Speaker independent experts told the Transport committee that England will receive tens of billions in rail investment over the next decade, while Wales will receive only a few hundred million, a gap so vast it can only be described as systemic neglect. And just this week, analysis by the Welsh Liberal Democrats showed that Wales is set to lose another 1 billion after Northern Powerhouse Rail was wrongly classified as an England and Wales project.

This brings the total lost for Wales through this accounting trick to around 6 billion, while Scotland and Northern Ireland receive their fair share. Meanwhile, the government expects Wales to be grateful for 445 million over ten years. It doesn't take a genius to see that those of us in Wales are being short changed. My constituents see the results every day. Rural stations left behind, limited services, long commutes and opportunities missed. The rail network in Wales is not second class by accident.

It is second class by design and this bill entrenches that design. It hands the UK Secretary of State even more control over decisions that directly affect Wales, with no matching powers for Welsh Ministers to shape the services that our communities rely on. So let me say this plainly a modern railway for Wales cannot be built on scraps of power handed down from Westminster. Wales needs the same powers that Scotland already has. Wales needs fairness, not favours, and Wales needs the tools to build a railway network worthy of our own people.

Wales deserves better than this bill and as Welsh Liberal Democrats, we will not accept anything less than equality for our nation.

17:37

Baggy Shanker MP (Derby South, Labour )

- -

Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I refer the House. To my interest as Vice Chair of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To my interest as Vice Chair of the rail APPG rail is in Derby's DNA. For decades. It's powered our DNA. For decades. It's powered our community, moulded our economy and inspired generations of engineers inspired generations of engineers and designers. I see the proof of that week in, week out. Whether it's meeting fantastic apprentices it's meeting fantastic apprentices at Alstom, celebrating railway 200 by bringing an incredible 40,000 people together in Derby for the greatest gathering, or hearing how organisations like Angel Trains and Porterbrook, and many more who drive forward innovation right across the sector from Derby.

So I was a proud derby MP I welcome this bill. At its heart, it stands up great British Rail and at the heart of Great British Rail is Derby. I was proud to campaign alongside so many others in our city who made the case for Derby to become GBR home, and I'm proud now to work alongside a government that is committed to delivering GBR in Derby. But despite our city's proud rail heritage, manufacturing credentials and exciting future at the heart of UK rail, people travelling by train in Derby face the same challenges as any other community.

Commuters up and down the country, they know the frustration of paying through the nose for a train ticket, only to find out that their train has been delayed or, even worse, cancelled, and they navigate through confusing, fragmented ticketing systems, trying to work out if splitting a ticket will save them extra money or just end up causing havoc. And I'm pleased that through this bill, our Labour government is clearly saying that this is simply not good enough. GBR will put passengers first, whether that's through a new robust passenger watchdog with real standards and teeth, or through simplifying and modernising fares with a common sense, consistent approach.

I also strongly welcome the bill's requirements for the Transport Secretary to publish a long term rail strategy, good for the sector and especially good for Derby, because for far too long rail has been at a feast and famine cycle, boom and bust orders, factories standing idle and workers and their and their families left in limbo. Derby knows this story all too well. Unfortunately, in recent years we've had to fight for the future of Alstom, pulling together across our city shoulder to shoulder with our fantastic trade unions to protect skilled jobs.

But this uncertainty is no way to run an industry that thousands of jobs depend upon. We need stability, we need certainty, and we need a long term plan. And that is exactly what this strategy will provide. Supporting our rail supply chains, protecting the thousands of jobs that depend on it, and giving businesses the confidence to invest in the future. Because when Britain backs rail, Britain backs derby and derby

**** Possible New Speaker ****

delivers for Britain. Yay, Cat Smith! Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Great Western Railway fares a 2.2 times higher than those of European operators. For similar lengths. Rail users in my constituency will be all too familiar with this reality, regularly paying more than £100 for regularly paying more than £100 for a return ticket to London. Since the Labour government came into power, we have seen the power of

17:41

Rebecca Smith MP (South West Devon, Conservative)

- -

power, we have seen the power of the unions once again with eye watering salary increases, yet no expectations to improve productivity. This means that on the line down to Devon, contracts were not changed. When salaries were increased, this would have cleared up the mess that is the lack of seven day a week contracts. Try travelling to Westminster on a Sunday. Madam Deputy Speaker, the creation of Great British Railways is being held up as a panacea to any such issues, with our railway having served the last year or so on the Transport Select Committee, where we have been tracking the progress of these plans, I remain unconvinced by the bill.

I gave my maiden speech during the passage of the Railway Passenger Railway Services Bill, the mechanism through which we have reached today. The bill which enabled the renationalisation of the railway. What I said then about that bill remains true as we debate this. It is a bill that seems to indicate ideological time travel back to the nationalised railway system of the past, and a mistaken belief that state run institutions are the answer to all our woes. Our railway system needs to drive forward into the middle of the 21st century and not creep backwards to the 1970s.

As a child of the 80s, I remember the old British Rail. Aside from the excitement of travelling on a 125 between Plymouth and my grandparents in Somerset, I do not recall it being any better than the privatised system we have today in the development of Great British Rail. The government must work with industry. There are real concerns that without a strong independent rail regulator, this bill will squeeze out private investment. Great British Railways, which will become the second biggest employer in the country.

Hardly an agile organisation will be calling the shots and as a result, the state owned operator will be chosen over private sector rivals. The office for Rail and Road sees its power significantly altered, some might say reduced. Even by this bill. It is arguable that they lose their teeth, and I would simply urge the government to keep passengers front and centre of this bill. And I'm not sure that the quango regulator that they're setting up is in passenger's best interests. Private investment extends to rail freight, which is not only competing with state owned operators, but also with road haulage.

The Rail Freight Group one warns that the bill risks driving the sector into decline, costing the UK economy up to £2.5 billion and adding 7 million additional HGV movements to the UK road network. Whilst the government has committed to introducing a statutory duty on GBR to promote the use of rail freight supported by an overall growth target, I would be grateful if the Minister would take the opportunity to clarify how this duty will operate in practice, and how it will ensure that GBR does not give preferential treatment to state owned operators, and where the bill places freight in the hierarchy of railway line use is critical.

The bill is not yet explicit on this, which is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

concerning now many members of the House. I will give way. I'm grateful to. My hon. Friend. I wonder whether

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend. I wonder whether she is concerned as I am, how Ministers will square their kind of responsibility to the trade unions, responsibility to the trade unions, who, of course, fund the party opposite and that of the producer interest, and whether she has any reflections on their past failure

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reflections on their past failure to get that balance right. Well, I thank my hon. Friend. And actually, he has raised a very interesting point, which is that I think the very good conditions that private companies have been forced into by trade unions are going to end up cheap across to these state employees. And ultimately, the best conditions will be the ones that get delivered to the most. All in that huge new employer. Now, many members from across this House have highlighted the importance of connecting underserved areas, and nowhere in the country is this case more powerfully than made than in the South West.

So before closing, I would like to highlight to the Minister two examples affecting my constituency, both featured in my maiden speech. So I know he is familiar with them and I will continue to champion them, as well as the need to secure the railway line at Dawlish. Now, many CrossCountry trains currently pass through Ivybridge station without stopping because the platform is too short. That forces local people to travel by bus or car to Plymouth, Totnes or Tiverton, making rail travel far less convenient. Now I've secured with local stakeholders the funding for the extension to have a feasibility study, but ultimately that modest project, that modest project would make a huge difference to our community and is something I hope is not hindered by this bill.

Now, I'm also committed to securing a Plymouth Metro, including plans for a station in Plympton in my constituency, Plympton's. 30,000 residents have been without a station for more than 60 years, and it would be transformative for that part of my patch. Now, both Plympton and Ivybridge have many residents working at Devonport Naval Base and the growing defence hubs in Turnchapel and Langauge. The government has promised billions of pounds to the city as part of a defence deal, but if that deal does not include funding for transport, what is the point? So I urge the government to ensure it is joined up in delivering the railway.

The city and surrounding communities need to deliver on the defence role the government wants. I support the efforts to improve our railway and bring ticket prices down. However, a simple return to a nationalised British Rail is not the answer. As conservatives, we understand the importance of retaining a strong, strong role for the public sector through open access, protecting rail freight,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

improving efficiency and providing order. Many colleagues have been waiting for a while for me to get every colleague in. I need to drop the speed limit to three minutes and encourage interventions not to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and encourage interventions not to be taken. The next person to speak will be Doctor Scott Arthur at three minutes. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. What a wonderful surprise. To have to wonderful surprise. To have to start by declaring that I am a huge fan of rail. Every week I travel to

17:46

Dr Scott Arthur MP (Edinburgh South West, Labour)

- -

this place via rail and my usual on my usual train. I'm able to get. I'm able to get to London in just four hours and 20 minutes. And since I came to the chamber today, I've had an email from LNER saying that that time is going to be decreased by ten minutes. So already this bill is delivering for people in my constituency. The people in my constituency. The journey is only slightly longer than the equivalent flight, although it uses 14 times less CO2 although it uses 14 times less CO2 and is 100 times more relaxing by train.

Most of the time, the journey runs smoothly. LNER is publicly owned, but like everyone here and everyone across the UK, I am familiar with the delays and cancellations that that regularly disrupt our wider railway. That is why I welcome the reforms that the railway Bill brings. It is a once in a lifetime chance to get our rails back, our railway system back on track. The creation of the Great British of Great British Rail will put passengers before profits. Simplified ticket purchasing and improved passenger accessibility across the network.

Something we have heard about already today. This bill also respects and preserves the existing devolution agreements concerning rail, giving Scottish Ministers the power of guidance and direction over GBR and ensuring that those changes directly benefit my constituents and the Scottish rail sector more widely. Importantly, this bill will trigger the integration of track and trains provision across the UK. This integration has been operating in Scotland for some years and does for the most part work well. It is true that there are some points of concern around provision in Scotland, including regular cancellations and delays, but I think by and large the system there works well.

I have to say that the reason that rail is in public ownership in Scotland is due to years of campaigning by the Labour Party and also our brothers and sisters in the trade union movement. The relationship between Network Rail and ScotRail is one area where GBR can take note and effect. It is an effective and joined up relationship between track and train and operators. It is vital to see a successful National Rail service reflect on this. So I welcome the fact that the Bill provides a basis for Scottish and UK Ministers to work together and provide efficient cross-border services, and I look forward to seeing the memorandum of understanding that will lay out exactly how this relationship will work.

So I look forward to supporting this bill. And I do say there has been quite a lot of comments from the Lib Dems and the Conservatives today asking for local improvements to be delivered locally via this bill, but yet they do not intend to support the bill itself. You cannot have your cake and eat it. Madam speaker, thank you very much. Spencer.

17:49

Dr Ben Spencer MP (Runnymede and Weybridge, Conservative)

- -

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. So my mission for my constituents So my mission for my constituents is to keep Runnymede and Weybridge moving and supporting and improving our train services are a vital part our train services are a vital part of delivering this. Regarding this bill, clearly the proof of the pudding is going to be in the eating in terms of the changes that it delivers for people living across Runnymede and Weybridge. And I'll give an example of how how much this means.

So Salesians is a school in my constituency which has many children coming from both the local but surrounding area, and they use the Chertsey branch line, which is one of the worst performing lines in South Western rail. It means that children are very often late in terms of going to school. It means that on the platforms the school has to allocate teachers because for safety, because when there are delays, the platforms get overcrowded. And this has material serious impacts in terms of the education of children.

And I'm sure this this experience is, is replicated by, by schools, not lesions but across the local area. And why is it so? The Chertsey Addlestone loop is punished by level crossings, both from Addlestone but also in Egham. The Pooley Green level crossing. Often I, only just a couple of months ago has downtimes of over ten minutes. I have constituents who tell me that they don't go to the fish and chip shop over the other side of the level crossing. They don't access local businesses because of the problem with level crossing downtimes.

It's absolutely critical that whatever happens in terms of this bill going forwards, we have improvements in terms of the level crossings, both in Egham, Addlestone and across my constituency, that we have some proper data, such as downtime monitors, so we can see properly the impact it's having on on local traffic that we have timetabling, which doesn't just change the click of fingers, but we have proper consultation with residents in terms of what's happening forward, so that not just the children going to school as my constituents, but the people who depend on commuting to go into work or to get around the city.

Families can have train trains that deliver properly that we didn't have these last minute cancellations, which seem to be increasingly more frequently. Certainly, I've seen over the past few months I'm a regular South Western in rail using myself. I live in Chertsey in my constituency and I see sadly the personally the impact this is having on my constituents. We also need improvements to accessibility. It's completely scandalous that the Weybridge lift still still has ongoing problems in terms of being out of service.

And that's not just a an accessibility isn't just limited to lifts. It's also stations. In terms of delivering access. The service needs to be responsive to the needs of my constituents. Yet too often my constituents end up being punished when particularly engineering work goes through our tracks, causing traffic carnage for the for the weekends. We need to co-ordinate engineering works when they happen with our local roads. Thank you Peter Swallow.

17:52

Peter Swallow MP (Bracknell, Labour)

- -

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm delighted to be able to speak today on this bill, which I hope will mark the start of a new era will mark the start of a new era for our rail system. Bracknell rail links are its lifeblood, connecting us to jobs, friends, family and opportunities through lines to London, reading and also Gatwick Airport from Crowthorne and Sandhurst. That's why I'm so delighted that SWR has now been brought back into public ownership, with GWR services shortly to follow.

Renationalisation of our rail services will create more opportunities for growth, more opportunities for investment and a rail service for the public good. First, the Chancellor froze rail fares in the Budget, meaning almost £300 saved off the cost of a season ticket from Bracknell to London. For my constituents. And now we are laying the foundations of a new, modern, joined up railway system owned by the public and run for the public. The new GBR livery revealed today, which proudly incorporates our Union Flag in its design, is, I think, a powerful symbol of the national pride we should feel in our railways.

But for many years, one that has been undermined by high prices and low reliability. Bracknell is already seeing the benefits of renationalisation. This has included an ongoing upgrade of the fleet on the Reading to Waterloo line, to the new trains, which will provide 50% increased capacity compared to the outdated class 455 fleet. They'll also provide accessible toilets, air conditioning, charging points at every seat, real time information screens, onboard Wi-Fi and walk through carriages, meaning more people can travel in better conditions every day.

And Madam Deputy Speaker, these trains were first purchased back in 2017, costing £1 billion, but were stuck in the sidings. What greater symbol of the failure of privatisation can there be than that? And I want to thank the Rail Minister for meeting with me recently and all of his work to roll out this new stock. I'm also delighted that the Bill makes provision for GBR to take control of the timetable, as the current system has led to some inexplicable gaps in service as the timetable stands after 9 p.m.

There is only one service from Bracknell to Reading an hour. Trains from Reading to Bracknell are also reduced to an hourly service after 10 p.m. Needless to say, this has significant impact on the ability of Bracknell Forest residents to travel for work and leisure, and I'd like to take this opportunity again to call for that to be addressed. Madam Deputy Speaker, I earlier mentioned the North Downs line. It is deeply unreliable and I know that members across the House are concerned about the need to electrify this line.

And I will also just touch on an issue. I know the Minister knows I care passionately about rail connection to Heathrow Airport as well, which is vitally important. And I know one that he cares passionately about delivering along with private sector investment. And on that I will leave it.

17:55

Liz Jarvis MP (Eastleigh, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Order. Liz Jarvis. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a pleasure to contribute to this debate. I am proud to represent a railway town. Eastleigh has a long railway heritage. However, over the past year, my constituents have been subjected to lots of delays and cancellations, all while paying a premium for the privilege of travelling by train. Madam Deputy Speaker, I agree that the current structure of the rail industry is too fragmented and in need of reform. A long term strategy, clear accountability and a coherent approach to infrastructure and operations are well overdue.

However, one of the biggest tests that this bill is whether it will improve services and increase accessibility and safety. I campaigned successfully to keep ticket offices at our local stations in Eastleigh open because for many passengers, including disabled people, older travellers, the vulnerable and those with visual impairments, staff stations are essential. Accessibility must be built into the system from the start to ensure people can travel with confidence. We need proper staffing arrangements, clear information, reliable lifts, step free access and a design approach that works for all passengers not just the most agile or those most familiar with the system.

Integrating rail infrastructure and operations under one public body is not inherently controversial. However, what the government have designed here looks more like a top down body answerable to Ministers rather than a modern, customer focussed railway. We have seen what Overcentralisation looks like in practice, and it rarely leads to better outcomes for passengers. So how will the Minister ensure that Great British Railways is genuinely accountable to passengers, not just to central government? To address the concerns of passengers, we need a much stronger and genuinely independent passenger voice in the system.

People need to know there is someone who will stand up for them when services fall short. I also hope the Minister will look at expanding discount schemes for young people. My constituency is lucky to have two fantastic colleges that draw students from across the region, with many travelling to Eastleigh by train. Keeping travel affordable is essential to allow them to access their education, without the cost of the journey becoming an obstacle. Madam Deputy Speaker Eastleigh deserves a railway that is reliable, affordable and fit for the future.

This bill contains some welcome measures, but it needs to go further to bring about the transformation of Britain's railways that our country needs and passengers deserve.

17:58

Perran Moon MP (Camborne and Redruth, Labour)

- -

Perran Moon Deputy Speaker. >> Perran Moon Deputy Speaker. >> The desperately poor condition. >> Of our railway system is entirely symbolic of the wider entirely symbolic of the wider decline in public services over the past 14 years. I regularly make the ten hour round trip up to London from west Cornwall on trains that are often beset with delays, lack

17:58

Liz Jarvis MP (Eastleigh, Liberal Democrat)

- -

of water or heating. My constituents know and feel this all

17:58

Perran Moon MP (Camborne and Redruth, Labour)

- -

constituents know and feel this all too well. Our one main railway line runs the length of Cornwall, from Penzance to cross the Tamar Bridge Penzance to cross the Tamar Bridge at Saltash, and it's a vital transport artery connecting south west England with Cornwall. Like west England with Cornwall. Like many other pressures faced by remote coastal and rural communities, there are unique difficulties. Fewer trains stop at Hayle, for example, and bus services are generally suspended there at about 6 p.m. cutting off communities to the west.

And to illustrate this point, even today, due to a fault with the signalling system, all trains from Penzance were cancelled. Great Western Railway is currently operated by FirstGroup, but under this Labour government's rail reform programme, it will be brought back into public ownership and integrated into Great British Railways next year. This transition will ensure that decisions about Cornwall's rail services are made in the public interest and not for private profit, and that passengers will see improvements in reliability, affordability and accountability.

We need a railway that is better governed, locally attuned and responsive to the people who depend on it, supporting growth in every region and the revival of the railway system must be innovative and practical. And I saw a great example of innovation a few weeks ago when I attended the launch of a superfast Wi-Fi pilot on on a train. Advanced engineering and connected connectivity solutions, combined with leadership and transport authorities, will deliver a new benchmark and support a long standing ambition to bring faster, more resilient Wi-Fi connectivity to Cornwall and South West England.

In 2021, a plan was published under the previous government, which included a recommendation for a new public body and a long term strategy for rail. But the conservative government failed to implement it. This bill will remove friction and bureaucracy and endemic in the current system. We have an opportunity to sweep away duplication of roles and departments to produce substantial savings and a smooth service. We can free up resources, trusting rail staff to better to build a better system from what is currently a bureaucratic, bloated and top heavy organisational ecosystem riddled with institutional incompetence, this Labour government will bring clarity where there was confusion, reliability where there was disruption and affordability, where costs were sky high.

And I very much look forward to supporting this bill.

18:01

Siân Berry MP (Brighton Pavilion, Green Party)

- -

Sian Berry. >> Madam Deputy Speaker. The Green Party welcomes this bill. It is right in principle to end the failed long experiment in surrendering this public service to the private market. Within the bill, we're pleased to see an expanded role for the Passenger Watchdog and clear requirements for business plans to be and strategies to be consulted upon published. And I want to see deep scrutiny around these in the procedures as well. And both passenger voices, rail workers and local elected representatives must have more control of what great British Railways offers in advance and during the development of these plans and strategies to.

I'm also pleased to see the duties laid out for Great British Railways include consideration for potential passengers. This will help to include many people better on the railways such as disabled people, people with buggies, older people, people for whom toilet access is more than crucial, and others for whom accessibility accessibility barriers are still too high on our railways. This is this, and the public interest duty should also help create social benefits for people for whom the cost of rail travel is prohibitive, including young people who need more connectivity and access to jobs and training.

But the bill still lacks on its face a specific duty to grow passenger numbers. We have an integrated transport strategy on the way, but here is a target for freight without one for passengers two. We need much more said in the bill about the need to plan for new capacity and services on the basis of maximum potential to reduce car dependency, to shift people away from the most polluting and socially unequal modes, not just to respond to current demand or congestion on the railways.

Public ownership is popular with the vast majority of people. For the last election, it was even backed by 60% of those intending to vote conservative, and it is a strong desire to for people in Brighton Pavilion for whom the legacy of privatisation is too often one of expensive and reliable services and big gaps in accessibility. I believe strongly that local voices, like those in Brighton, must be more in control of our public services, and we need more clarity on how mayoral, local and combined authorities will be able to have more control of investment plans and services.

During the previous bill, I argued for public ownership of rolling stock companies too, and I understand that decisions are being made for future rolling stock not to be published, published, purchased through this evil twin of PFI. But the fact remains that the current rolling stock is a scandal. ROSCOs page £275 million in dividends to shareholders in the year 2024 to 25, payments that are up by 59% in five years. This is outrageous profiteering and a drain on public finances, so I urge the government to cut this waste, find ways to bring our rolling stock into public hands, and look at a windfall tax on the current ROSCOs to address this injustice.

Thank you.

18:04

Daniel Francis MP (Bexleyheath and Crayford, Labour)

- -

Daniel Francis. Madam Speaker. I wish to draw attention to my role as chair of the all party group for wheelchair users and rise to support the measures supported within the railway Bill. Firstly, I know the measures will be supported by my constituents who predominantly travel from the four train stations of Barnehurst, Bexleyheath and Crayford, all locations within my constituency and three of those stations are solely served by Southeastern, with the benefits of nationalisation beginning to be seen on the service.

For instance, in a new timetable taking effect next week, the line will see both additional evening services to London Charing Cross and increased capacities at weekend to Victoria. I do appreciate there remains more to be done and I'll continue to campaign for improvements. I have a long standing interest in these matters, having served for four years as a member of the Board of London TravelWatch, or as is technically known and referred to in the Bill, the London Transport Users' Committee. It's that experience which lives with me and the reasons why I support the bill.

On far too many occasions at board meetings, I heard excuses from train operating companies and Network Rail blaming each other for issues relating to punctuality. This led to lunacy, where hundreds of staff were employed to establish who should cover the costs of delays, and earlier this year we saw that Southeastern Network Rail Kent route united under a single leadership team to form Southeastern Railway, and this partnership is delivering improvements with increased customer satisfaction, reduced cancellations and initiatives including shared planning data and track access without service disruption and trials of drone and AI technology.

I also welcome the measures included to help ensure the railway is made more accessible for all. Hon. Members will have heard my towels and my experience of using public transport. As a parent of a wheelchair user, and my requests for the introduction of a National Rail Accessibility Act. I'm therefore delighted that the Secretary of State has named accessibility as one of the key six objectives for the railway and having one national, rather than competing operators will improve the assistance offered and the simplification of ticketing for disabled passengers.

Importantly, paragraph 49, schedule three of the Bill will amend the Equality Act 2010 to ensure that public sector equality duty applies to GBR. I welcome the government's roadmap to an accessible railway based around seven priority themes. And lastly, I welcome the establishment of expanded Passenger Watchdog. Having served on the board of London TravelWatch and having worked alongside Transport Focus rather on some aspects of joint working during that time, those changes within London London Transport Users' Committee include the expansion of the current role for my constituents, which will see a particular regard to the interests and the needs of disabled people and for the reasons I've outlined.

I look forward to voting against the amendments this evening and in favour of the bill at Second Reading.

18:07

Ann Davies MP (Caerfyrddin, Plaid Cymru)

- -

And Davis. by simplifying and integrating aspects like freight or passenger services, ticketing and long term planning is welcome. This bill makes great sense for England. However, it does not work for Wales. Currently, two governments on either side of the M4 control different parts of what should be a single unified train and rail network in Wales. This bizarre split makes for designing railways in the best interests of the people of Wales. Almost impossible. We can see this in the broken promise by Whitehall to fully electrify South Wales main line beyond Cardiff, or even to start work on the equivalent line in the north.

This overlooking of Wales will not only continue as under the Bill, Welsh Ministers can only request that Wales is consulted in long term rail planning as part of an England and Wales strategy. The people of Wales don't want consultation. We deserve control. Wales. This lack of control means funding. Decisions from Westminster are made at our expense and injustice, which this bill is silent on and with Welsh control over the. The rail track by tall could no longer continue its preserve logic of designating English rail projects such as HS2, Oxford, Cambridge rail and now the Northern Powerhouse Rail as England and Wales.

Projects which combine currently deny £6 billion a two Wales in funding. And the absurdity of this situation is laughable. If it wasn't so serious, it's laughable. Not one of these projects has an inch of track in Wales. Whilst in opposition, the Secretary of State of Wales previously called for to for Wales to receive 4.6 billion in funding. She is U-turned on this and now celebrates only 350 million, which was announced at the Spending Review for Wales Rail over the next few years.

Just 5% of what we as a country are owed. Whilst welcome, the money doesn't touch the sides when it comes to decades and decades of underfunding we have experienced. It saddens me to say that this government has decided to follow an age old adage for Wales, Jesse England. And we are the only nation in Great Britain who does not have full control over our own rail network. Only last week, 11 Welsh Labour members of the Senate wrote a letter to the Prime Minister saying that expectations were raised by the Labour Party in opposition, that they would support devolution of rail to Wales.

Plaid is clear the Welsh Rail should be in Welsh hands and it's time to devolve this to Wales.

18:09

Alex Ballinger MP (Halesowen, Labour)

- -

Alex Ballinger Madam Deputy Speaker.

18:10

Ann Davies MP (Caerfyrddin, Plaid Cymru)

- -

In our part.

18:10

Alex Ballinger MP (Halesowen, Labour)

- -

of building trains and building railways. Indeed, in Stourbridge, just one stop down the line, the company foster, Rastrick and Company built the Stourbridge Lion, which was the very first steam which was the very first steam locomotive that was exported to the Americas in 1829. But since the closure of Halesowen train station closure of Halesowen train station or the closure of passenger services in 1927, my constituents have had to travel to Cradley Heath, have had to travel to Cradley Heath, to Old Hill and Rowley Regis to get on to the Birmingham Worcester Worcester Line through Snow Hill, and sadly the performance of that line is very poor.

Only 70% of West Midlands Trains are on time and 7% of those trains are cancelled. This means my constituents are getting the train beforehand so they can ensure they get their connection and get their meetings on time. And frustratingly, that train route no longer goes into Birmingham New Street. So if they have to move across the country to other parts and make connections elsewhere, they have to do a ten minute walk through the middle of Birmingham from Moor Street to Birmingham New Street to catch that connection.

So with that context, I welcome this bill that puts great British Railways on a statutory footing as the guiding mind of the system. And that brings us to a single body that will be responsible for managing the infrastructure, planning and services and overseeing planning operations. I'm also welcoming the fact that franchising was abolished in November, and West Midlands Trains will be brought back into public ownership in February 2026. Public ownership of Great British Railways gives us a chance to simplify objectives, run the trains on time with enough seats at a fair price.

I also wanted to highlight the Midlands Rail Hub, which is a programme of improvements that will deliver real improvements for the people of Halesowen. Midlands Connect estimates this scheme will deliver 300 extra trains a day in and out of Birmingham, with 20 million extra seats a year, providing many shorter and faster journeys on the Birmingham Worcester Line that my constituency runs on. And this means more trains from Kidderminster and Worcester through Stourbridge and past Rowley, Cradley Heath to Birmingham. More capacity at Moor Street easing the pressure that ripples back down the line, and an opportunity for trains to run direct from my constituency into Birmingham New Street, so people will be able to make that onward journey up into the rest of the country.

Madam Deputy Speaker, the Black Country helped give our country and the world the railways, and my constituents are not asking for anything extravagant in return. They want a service that runs on time with enough carriages, under a system where someone is clearly in charge and clearly accountable. They want the benefits of Midlands rail hub and rail nationalisation to deliver fewer cancellations, shorter journey times and a decent chance of getting a seat. So if we get this right, we will not only honour our railways past, we will finally give our constituents the modern railway that they deserve.

18:13

Gideon Amos MP (Taunton and Wellington, Liberal Democrat)

- -

Gideon Amos. >> Gideon Amos. >> Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's a pleasure to contribute to this debate, and I want to start this debate, and I want to start off with the things I welcome in this bill and what the government is doing on railways. And after increasing fares by almost 5% last year, it is very welcome that the government have frozen rail fares, something that Liberal Democrats have been asking for for seven years. So that's really positive. And it's also positive is the investment by the government in the new station at Wellington in my constituency, which is deserves credit from for the government in terms of that investment.

It's important that DfT is involved in that project, and I may write to the Minister afterwards to take that issue forward, because it's one of the few small number of new stations being built in the country. It's really important that it's seen through, and it needs and needs to be recognition that the year of delay has, of course, increased costs. I'd also want to I'd like to say some words on the importance of open access providers of rail.

And I'm concerned about the provisions in the bill that make open access potentially a lot more difficult. Go up rail wanting to open a route from Taunton through to Wiltshire is very important in that regard, and we would also want to see opportunities, of course, for future investment in railways, including reopening lines. There's a heritage line from Taunton to Minehead that should ultimately be provided with a proper rail service. If it was, the West Somerset Railway would become an open access railway on the same line, so open access is incredibly important.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I just wish to add that the importance of for most of my constituents is not just it's seeing the new station like Wellington, but also seeing a reduction in fares and also in improvement in reliability. Trains from Taunton recently have been cut in half, meaning that people can't get on the trains. It needs that kind of form of investment and moving over rail strictly, just moving over the rail institutions from private sector to public sector and not necessarily going to deliver the improvements we need.

So I remain to be convinced on this bill. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Speaker.

18:15

Mary Kelly Foy MP (City of Durham, Labour)

- -

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I'm pleased to be speaking on a very important to my constituents. For too long, our railway has been held back by fragmentation, competing interests and a lack of clear accountability by bringing services back into public hands and creating great British railways. This bill gives us the opportunity to plan, run and improve the railway as a single coherent system for my constituents in the city of Durham, a key priority is reliability. People want trains to turn up when they're meant to, connections they can trust, and information they can rely on.

A unified public operator with responsibility for timetabling, infrastructure and service delivery gives us the best chance of reducing disruption and building a network that consistently, consistently works day in and day out. A strengthened public railway also depends on the people who operate it. The workforce is essential to improving reliability and delivering a better experience for passengers, so staff deserve clarity about how and if the transition into GBR will affect their jobs. If we want a well-run railway, we must support the people stations and run the trains.

So Ministers do continue constructive dialogue with trade unions to ensure that the employment conditions of their members are protected. In the process of creating GBR and into the future. And finally, Madam Deputy Speaker, the need for a more coordinated railway has been brought into sharp focus in Durham. Recently, Lner's proposed timetable changes would have removed important morning commuter services that many residents rely on. I worked closely with local people to challenge those plans and I welcome the progress made, but the experience showed how vulnerable local connectivity can be when decisions are made in isolation or via flawed consultation processes.

Communities must have certainty that key links will be protected, strengthened and not placed at risk. This bill gives us the chance to build a railway that is more reliable, better connected and more focussed on meeting public need, and I support it strongly and I look forward to working with Ministers to ensure that as it progresses, it delivers the improvements, passengers enduring respect and the support that rail workers deserve, including my niece Kate, who has just started her training with Northern Rail and I look forward to her getting me to King's Cross and back to Durham on time and safely in the future.

Here. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This summer I was travelling by train to a conference and I managed

18:18

Alex Mayer MP (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard, Labour)

- -

to lose my bag and I did what everyone in that circumstance would do panicked slightly because I had do panicked slightly because I had my purse in it, my keys in it. My House of Commons passed in it and I thought, who on earth do I contact? thought, who on earth do I contact? Because I wasn't entirely sure where I'd left it. Had I left it on the train, had I perhaps left it as the train, had I perhaps left it as station when I was changing trains? Indeed, which train had I left it on altogether? All the station staff were really helpful, and they staff were really helpful, and they all pointed me to different online forms, and my faith was absolutely restored in humanity.

I have to say. About two weeks later, when everything was found, all still in the bag and I got an email saying come and collect it, paid for £10 and got it back, and then about three weeks later got another email, this time from TfL, who I'd also contacted, telling me. Unfortunately my bag had not been found and they had finished the search for it. This, I think, is just one example of how we've got a completely unjoined up railway, and therefore I was kind of struck in the bill by the fact we've still got five, I think, mentions of competition, but no mentions of standardisation.

And I think it's standardisation which our passengers are really after. Then just a couple of other points that I thought the Minister might be able to provide a bit of commentary on clause 18, which my hon. Friend from the Transport Select Committee mentioned before about the lack of a growth target for passengers. I think that might be missing, though I do very much welcome the phrase potential users. It felt very much like the prospective passengers. I was trying to get into the buses but didn't.

Then on funding, I really welcome the five year stability for infrastructure funding. But is that not something that we could also extend to operations? And I'd be grateful for the Minister's views on whether schedule two allows Ministers to too easily cut funding mid period on devolution. I hope that we will be getting some guidance soon on how mayoral combined strategic authorities will be able to get those powers. How do you get a devolved railway? And I also think that potentially through the bill, there's many references to male strategic authorities, but perhaps the wording sometimes should be mare, because I think it's important that we actually consult with the democratically elected person.

Finally, on open by default data, can the Minister assure us that all ticket sellers are going to get exactly the same data that GBR gets? But all in all, I think this is a fantastic bill. So all on track, full steam ahead.

18:21

Chris Bloore MP (Redditch, Labour)

- -

Chris Law Deputy speaker, I must begin by declaring an interest. I have been a railway geek since childhood, travelling up and down the country and a member of my own rail user group. I personally kept both Hornby and Bachmann train models alive for several years, and now I torment my own son by taking them on the Severn Valley Railway far more than he would prefer. I also declare my membership as an Aslef parliamentary group member, as well as being a regular commuter who did not recognise the railway utopia described in the opposition's opening remarks.

Those interests, both personal and formal, only strengthen my belief that this bill marks an important moment for our railway network and for the people who rely on a fit for purpose service. For too long, passengers have lived with the consequences of a fragmented railway system divided between multiple operators, split responsibilities, inconsistent priorities and a lack of clear accountability. The result has been a network that too often fails to meet the needs of my commuters in Redditch, who just last week faced every rail, every service being cancelled on the morning because of poor weather.

At its heart, this bill brings together track and train Network Rail and the passenger operators under one coherent structure. This is the most significant structural reform of our railways in a generation, and it restores the principle that the railway should operate as a single integrated system. Passengers understand this. Those who work on the railway understand it, and organisations like my Own Network, Railway User Group and Aslef have long campaigned for an integrated national system, have consistently argued that our railways simply work better when they work together.

This bill delivers delivers simplicity. Today's railway involves a bewildering array of actors, 17 different organisations with overlapping responsibilities. This structure does not serve passengers, freight customers, all the taxpayer. Great British Railways brings clarity, a single guided mind, a single organisation responsible for the railway's performance and a single body accountable to Parliament and the public that will alone improve the experience of millions of travellers. Madam Deputy Speaker, the broad implication of this bill are clear it introduces long term planning, strengthens freight Modernises ticketing systems and ensures that the railways are accountable to the public it serves.

Two. Often my residents and Redditch have suffered from cancellations and poor service. This bill, on top of the investment into the Midlands rail hub a freeze, a freezing in fares lays the foundations for an integrated railway, one that works for passengers and staff who keep the system running every day. It is an important and necessary step towards building a railway worthy of the future of this country.

18:23

Jayne Kirkham MP (Truro and Falmouth, Labour )

- -

Jayne Kirkham. government is simplifying a very complex system to set forward a railway that's fit for the future, and I really welcome that. On timetabling tickets and merging of those 17 bodies. I also welcome the 30 year long term rail strategy. That's a fantastic idea for Cornwall. Rail is so vital in Cornwall, but it's a slow, badly designed mainland main line. Sorry Brunel, but it goes in the wrong places. Very poorly defended. But we have very successful and busy branch lines and St Ives and Falmouth.

We would like more of those Wi-Fi on trains. We've just done a pilot on that. We may have very slow trains, but we would like very fast Wi-Fi, and if that could be rolled out across the southwest, that would really help us on those ten hour return journeys. Staff. They are fantastic that if they probably will have a single employer, but it would be good to have that confirmed. And the insourcing from contracting out, particularly on things like cleaning and food. And my goodness, I plea for a return of the buffet and not that trolley that goes up and down and you can never get to it.

But the majority. What I want to focus my speech on really, is how much I welcome the duty to promote the role of rail freight and set the growth target for rail freight. And I want to set out a huge opportunity for the Minister and the Department for Transport in Falmouth. We have a beautiful multi-use port that covers defence repair crews, floating offshore wind, hopefully in the future and export in Falmouth. We also have the rebirth of the critical minerals industry in Cornwall and a £50 million strategy from this government that leads to a great requirement for transport, for freight transport.

Each each railway, each railway train would take 129 lorries off our narrow Cornish roads. We have the full support of our businesses, our Chamber of commerce, our council and we have an enterprise zone. We need, as a next step, a feasibility study. So for a very small amount of money in the grand scheme of things, we could open up that 150 yards of rail freight down to Falmouth Docks and provide a step for the future so our critical minerals can come into and leave Cornwall, and we can grow our economy as we would love to do here.

18:26

Dr Marie Tidball MP (Penistone and Stocksbridge, Labour)

- -

Thank you. most special moments of my first year as an MP was singing ABBA on the Penistone Line train with The Wonderful Week and Survive choir travelling through my beautiful constituency. This line is the spine connecting South and West Yorkshire between Huddersfield and Sheffield. It courses through eight constituencies serving over half a million people, connecting six hospitals, four universities as well as several Fe colleges, hundreds of schools and GP surgeries. It laces together communities with rich histories, vibrant high streets and industry with huge potential.

When I was growing up, our South Yorkshire transport system was the envy of the world. But 14 years of the Conservatives broken promises resulted in an unacceptable north south transport divide. On the day that the previous conservative government announced Network North was going to be spent on potholes in London, three out of the six Penistone Line services were cancelled. And what about reform? They haven't even bothered to turn up to the debate today. They don't care about rail, but this government does.

I am thoroughly delighted to support this bill, to take back control with great British Railways, to deliver the improvements for customers and to take long term decisions in the national interest. The partnership are a brilliant advocate for our local line. Their voices will be strengthened by this bill's introduction of a new passenger watchdog, setting tough standards. This Labour Government bill, along with the work of our Labour Mayor Oliver Coppard and local councils, provides the opportunity to restore a transport network that is once again the envy of the world, delivering phases one and two of the Penistone Line upgrades.

Our Labour Government has already begun to power that change, with our £48 million investment in phase one. Phase two is much needed. We must go further and fulfil the recommendation of Lord Blunkett. Yorkshire's plan for rail, which will include delivering two trains an hour South and West Yorkshire, deserve better than the once an hour service that we have currently on this line, and it will be crucial that the second stage in the is covered in the next spending review to ensure that my constituents in Silkstone Common, Penistone, Chapeltown and all the places in between can get to college, university, hospital and employment.

My constituency has helped to build the prosperity of this great nation. It needs this line's second upgrade to ensure it is once more the beating heart.

18:29

Dave Robertson MP (Lichfield, Labour)

- -

Order, order Dave Robertson Madam Deputy Speaker. falling standards under the Conservatives, this Labour government is investing in our railways. Anyone who commutes from railways. Anyone who commutes from Lichfield to London, as I do every week, will have seen for themselves how sorely needed this is. We've all had trains cancelled, rerouted, crammed in with standing room only, this Railways Bill creating Great British Railways is the biggest overhaul to our rail system in a generation. GBR will run our trains, set the timetable and control track stations and depots.

It's about putting our railways squarely back in taxpayers hands. A public service under public control. Great British Railways will be a step change compared to some of the difficulties that my constituents in places like Fradley, Handsacre and Speciality Street have had with his two years of delay and disruption under the last government. This government is putting new management in place in HS2 to sort it out and I know my hon. Friend, the right hon. Friend the Transport Secretary will be holding them to account, just as you will be holding Great British Railways to account.

It's really important that we get this right because the failings of HST limited have been so significant for so long, continuing under the way that the previous government ran our IRAs is clearly not the way forwards, especially when we look ahead and we look at the wonderful project that is Midlands Rail Hub.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah, yeah yeah, yeah. GBR will give taxpayers control over the railways and projects like over the railways and projects like the rail hub by investing record sums in upgrading the network. That sums in upgrading the network. That project, the almost £1 billion, will mean that the clogged Birmingham mean that the clogged Birmingham New Street will have its capacity significantly increased, allowing 300 more trains to run through the 300 more trains to run through the city each day. It's going to unlock huge increases in the number of services across the Midlands and beyond.

This is amazing news for people in Lichfield, Burntwood and villages, especially those who use the cross city line, which links

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lichfield to Birmingham and is the London. Yeah. Since Covid we've only had two

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Since Covid we've only had two trains an hour and Midland Rail Hub will help us get that back to the four that we need. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Beyond that, though, Labour believes in our Railways publicly owned, run for people, not profit owned, run for people, not profit no longer should share shareholders benefit while passengers suffer poor service. And I really want to see every single pound from tickets reinvested in great services and further expanding our rail network in my area, the next stage of rebuilding our railways really does need to be getting a passenger service back on the line from Lichfield to Burton and Derby, and with a new station at Wells for the National Memorial Arboretum.

This arboretum is our national centre for remembrance, but public transport links to it are extremely limited, opening that line up and reinvesting what we can from a publicly owned railway service into that will connect people to jobs and take pressure off our roads. My hon. Friend, the Transport Secretary has heard me make the case before and she'll hear it again. And I will keep pushing the business case for that line under a new publicly owned railway service.

18:32

Laurence Turner MP (Birmingham Northfield, Labour)

- -

Yeah. And now we turn at last to a fundamental question, which has perhaps gone unasked in this House for too long. What is the mass and acceleration of an average sized peacock? The question, Madam Deputy Speaker, does not spring from the pages of the script for The Goon Show or Monty Python. It is a real case that came before the rail industry's delay attribution board. You see a delay caused by a collision between a train and a small bird is the responsibility of a private operator who pays the cost of compensation.

But if the unfortunate bird is deemed to be large, then taxpayers are on the hook. And so it came to be one day expensive lawyers gathered to compare calculations and precedent and argue out whether that poor, unfortunate peacock was more akin to a goose than a duck. Few incidents better illustrate the costly absurdities of rail privatisation. It is worth reflecting on the fact that the cost of privatisation is borne by all taxpayers, whether they use railway or not. The railways received nearly £700 million in subsidy in 1990 to 91 by 2018 2019, before the pandemic impaired the industry's finances, the net subsidy requirement had increased to 4.3 billion, an increase after inflation of some 236%, more than doubling even after passenger journey increases have been accounted for.

And to this day, subsidy is lower in Northern Ireland, where the railways remained in public hands. Are everywhere. The railways contingent parts are divided and separated by contractual barriers. For passengers, that can mean station staff who cannot even board a train to help someone down with mobility issues because they work for different companies. There is a multiplicity of these unnecessary contractual barriers, and public money and public confidence drains through each one. Madam Deputy Speaker. We should not expect a complete change of services on day one of operations under GBR, as there were not on the government's vesting day for nationalisation in 1948, but change over time it will, and for the better, including for my constituents who travel from Longbridge, Northfield and King's Norton.

This bill is the instrument of that transformation. Tonight's vote is on the principle of establishing great British railways, and in the weeks ahead, there will be time for that detailed line by line scrutiny, which I look forward to contributing to, including through the Transport Select Committee. But for tonight, I just want to say that there can be no doubt that this is the right policy and the right bill. It has been a privilege to have had the occasional view of the development of this area of transport policy down the years, and I look forward to voting for it tonight.

18:35

Jacob Collier MP (Burton and Uttoxeter, Labour)

- -

Final contribution Jacob Collier. As we mark 200 years of our railways, it's fitting that we are embarking on a new chapter in the history of our railways. They continue to be an integral part of the story of Britain, and I'm reminded of this every time I visit London. Saint Pancras, a place that helped Burton upon Trent become a brewing powerhouse. Passengers' Council platform walk where Burton beer barrels were once stacked high, it is a reminder of the importance of our railways in shaping the very fabric of Britain and of course, supplying punters with the very best beer.

Great British Railways will be the new guiding mind of our railways, joining up operations of our railways and putting passengers at the heart of the rail service. Particularly important is the focus that the bill places on disabled people, who must currently navigate a network of inaccessible stations, and the constant worry of whether accessibility services will be in place. Our railways are and must be for all. My constituency of Burton and Uttoxeter borders what will be the new home of GBR Derby? And putting aside our rivalries for a second, this is going to bring benefits to my area and the wider region.

Building on that 185 years of rail expertise, the long term rail strategy will be the first of its kind in setting out strategic objectives over the next 30 years. And just as in defence, we are creating an always on supply chain. I welcome that long term approach. That means that we can bring security to rail workers and prevent the cliff edge that we've seen affecting workers in Derby and Newton Aycliffe. I know that my hon. Friend for Birmingham Northfield would like to see the Intercity Swallow livery return, but delivering improved passenger services must be the priority and it's on what this government is going to be judged.

We've heard in the committee concerns about rail freight, which have been addressed today, particularly clause 63 and around the operator's appeal process, as set out in clause 68, which is equivalent to a judicial review. And some of the evidence we heard believes that that is a very high threshold. Madam Deputy Speaker, for my constituents in Burton and Uttoxeter, this Railways Bill is exactly the change that they want to see with public ownership. We're taking a long term approach to railways with investment through GBR, putting passengers and railway workers back at the heart of their railway.

In 2027, CrossCountry and East Midlands Railway are coming into public ownership, and it's not long until the people of Burton and Uttoxeter will see that benefit of a publicly owned railway. I know the reality right now is that people face unaffordable tickets, unreliable or cancelled services in accessible stations, overcrowded, crowded carriages. For many of my constituents, this is a barrier to railway travel and this bill is about changing that. This Railways

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bill is how we turn those promises we made in the election to get our railways back on track. Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. Mayhew. Yes. Madam Deputy Speaker, it's been

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker, it's been a very popular debate. A lot of people have contributed. Congratulations to all those who've managed to make their points in just three minutes. I'm going to try and do my best to summarise the debate as we go on. I'm going to

18:38

Jerome Mayhew MP (Broadland and Fakenham, Conservative)

- -

start by noting the excellent contributions from these benches. The hon. Member for the Isle of Wight East, who brilliantly managed to discuss a railway bill by referring to ferries and. But he did make the very serious point that we don't want ideology reforming the railways, we want pragmatism. The hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham made the good point that the taxpayer now has to replace private investment through nationalisation. The hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills made three important points that the reforms, as proposed, simply advances sprawling centralisation of powers.

That it takes practical practicality as giving way to ideology again, and that the reforms the drafting puts open access concessions at risk. The hon. Member for South West Devon, a member of the Transport Select Committee, again was concerned that this was ideological time travel taking us back to the 1970s. And the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge said that the cancellations had increased on South West trains on Post-nationalisation on his Chertsey Addlestone loop. Now there are also many very thoughtful contributions from the Liberal Democrats, and it is telling Madam Deputy Speaker that the government's insistence on nationalisation as being the only answer has united the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives nothing.

But it's also working. It's worth noting that there's there's nothing from the packet party. I think that they still support nationalisation, but then again, transport policies, they wouldn't recognise one if it slapped them in the face. And then there was Labour speech after speech, welcoming the nationalisation of the railways and showing deep bring it on and showing deep suspicion of the profit motive. The tone was set by the right hon. Lady, the Member for Swindon South. She said that the current system and I quote benefits companies over passenger services as those, as those, as though those two statements are mutually exclusive.

Her tone was followed by the members for Wrexham Stockport Salford prioritise profit over customer experience. There's been large scale profiteering on the railways, prioritised dividends over people. And so I could go on. This is the authentic voice of labour that the private sector isn't good. It's not good in the way that the state is good, the private sector it invests to make a return, not to create unionised jobs. It innovates to make a return, not to satisfy a government productivity goal, innovates to beat the competition, to make a return, not to satisfy a ministerial target.

But it does invest, it does innovate and it does improve to compete. But Labour clings on to its ideological faith in the efficiency of the state, despite all the evidence to the contrary. And there is evidence because, after all, we've tried

**** Possible New Speaker ****

this experiment before, I will give way. Giving way. When the when the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Giving way. When the when the hon. Member for Orpington was the shadow Transport Secretary, he was shadow Transport Secretary, he was recorded saying that his party would likely not reverse nationalisation because the public nationalisation because the public would be unlikely to think it is a good idea. Is it his policy if this Bill passes to privatise the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Bill passes to privatise the railways all over again? Good point. If you actually nationalise it first. But this party is here to lead, not to follow, but to lead, not to follow. But there has been plenty of evidence because we have tried the nationalised experiment before. The railways Madam Deputy Speaker were nationalised in 1948. Listen, you might learn something. It was nationalised in 1948, when there were a billion passenger journeys. A year thereafter. The impact of nationalisation was immediate.

Year after year, fewer customers chose to use the trains. Year after year they voted with their feet because the service did not give them what they wanted, wasn't focussed on them and their needs. There was no investment because the railways were competing with schools and hospitals, followed by poor industrial relations, with an organisation more focussed on itself than its customers. The hon. Lady says from a sedentary, sedentary position it was because there were cars, there were more cars. Well, let's just hold that in our minds because by the 1990s, not a billion, but just 735 million passenger journeys took place.

And in 1993 the system was privatised by the conservative government. The unions hated it. Labour therefore hated it too. But every year more and more passengers were attracted to use the trains. Not just a few more, not just a few more, but vastly more. By 2019, 1.75 billion people were using the railways each year, and there were more cars, many more cars. Labour. Labour can't explain it. It shouldn't have happened. It shouldn't have happened. But it did. It did.

If the purpose of the railway is to carry passengers, then any rational observer must conclude that privatisation beat nationalisation hands down. Why? Because profit is only made if you attract customers. So train operating companies focussed on new trains, more trains, more services, innovative ticketing, customer service and people voted with their feet. Madam Deputy Speaker, the railways are a complex system where capacity is limited and costs are high. It's absolutely crucial to drive efficiency to maximise the scarce resources of track access and to drive value for money by dynamic management.

Think of a nationalised, think of a nationalised organisation that's a byword for management, dynamism and efficiency anywhere in any country at any time. I can't either. If poor railway management is the problem, then nationalisation cannot be the solution. Why is it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that socialists and the packet party are such bad learners and I will give way? I will. Thank my hon. Friend. For.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For. Giving way. And of course, the Minister who's in his position represents Selby and one of the represents Selby and one of the great successes of the open system has been Hull Trains, providing a fantastic service through Selby fantastic service through Selby from Hull down to London and back again. And can does my hon. Friend again. And can does my hon. Friend like me, worry that open services like that are going to be crushed

**** Possible New Speaker ****

by great British Railways and the say. I'm very grateful for the intervention of my right hon. intervention of my right hon. Friend, and he's absolutely right. If you read the bill properly, it spells the death knell for open spells the death knell for open access. Now, it's true that the last few years exposed serious weaknesses in the train franchise weaknesses in the train franchise model. The separation of track and train created perverse incentives. I accept that too often, lack of I accept that too often, lack of effective competitive competitive tension allowed poor services.

Changes to the DfT contract meant that franchises were encouraged to overbid, leaving them financially vulnerable to any downturn. This bill was the golden opportunity to address these issues, but they've messed it up. They've messed it up. Instead of keeping the best and fixing the rest, we have a damaging return to 1970s state control, with 1970s industrial action likely to follow, the government is already finding out that money doesn't grow on trees. That merely saying that you're in favour of growth doesn't make it happen, and that funds from hard pressed taxpayers are not limitless.

Their plan replaces private investment, with taxpayers money drawn away from schools and hospitals, and Labour's ever growing welfare bill. Their plan replaces railway management teams with civil servants increasingly micromanaging operations with powers to direct powers to direct GBR across all its functions. And then there's that trademark socialist arrogance. Gone is the independent economic regulator. The gentleman from Whitehall knows best. GBR will mark its own homework, save for a toothless Passengers' Council that has no enforcement powers. And it's not just its homework.

It will also decide whether to allow any competition against itself. It will decide how much to charge its competitors, limited only by how much it thinks they will be able to pay. GBR, on the other hand, will pay no charge at all, and the right of appeal not allowed on the merits of a decision, only on the grounds of procedural irregularity. This bill marks the end of competition on the GBR rail network, and it's such a shame this could have been transformational. It could have solved the tensions between operators of track and train.

It could have refined concession and franchise contracts, removing the micromanagement of DfT officials. It could have solved the stop start funding approach by National Rail. With its dysfunctional control periods, it could have focussed relentlessly on benefits to passengers and the taxpayer, and instead a floundering government at 14% in the polls, with backbenchers in open revolt, open revolt against their own leader. Where unite! Where unite their union paymaster is discussing disaffiliation in the press, a government desperate to shore up its fading support sacrifices the future of our railways on the altar of left wing ideology, speech after speech Madam Deputy Speaker demonising profit as a motive for economic activity.

Do Labour MPs have any idea how the productive economy works? Ideology before practicality, state direction before dynamic management. Union demands before passenger demand? No no no. I ask colleagues to support the reasoned amendment in my name, and to help put this bad bill in the bin.

18:48

Keir Mather MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport) (Selby, Labour)

- -

18:59

Division

19:25

Remaining Orders of the Day

>> Thank you. Move. >> The question is as on the Order Paper as made that opinion, say Paper as made that opinion, say aye. I the contrary. No. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. We. Now we must now take the motion

**** Possible New Speaker ****

relating to deferred divisions. Minister to move. I beg to move. The question is the motion relating to deferred divisions as relating to deferred divisions as may I the contrary? No. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Carry

**** Possible New Speaker ****

have it. The ayes have it. Carry over motion to be moved formally. To move. The question is, as on the order papers that say I. Contrary. No. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. That concludes that bit of business. If Ministers wish to swap over the front benches.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Now he's got.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Now he's got. With the leave of the House, I will bundle the next two S's will bundle the next two S's together. Motion number six on International development and motion number seven on Customs

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Minister to move. I beg. The question is, as on the Order Paper that opinion, say aye. I as the contrary. No, the ayes have it.

19:26

Petitions

19:31

Adjournment: Levels of illegal migrants whose whereabouts are unknown

now adjourn. >> The question is that this House do now adjourn and call Rupert Lowe do now adjourn and call Rupert Lowe on levels of illegal migrants whose whereabouts are unknown. Rupert Lowe.

19:31

Rupert Lowe MP (Great Yarmouth, Independent)

- -

19:46

Mike Tapp MP, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Dover and Deal, Labour)

- -

This debate has concluded

Return to start of debate - Return to top of page