Railways Bill

Steve Witherden Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 10th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Monica Harding]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

--- Later in debate ---

[Ben Maguire (North Cornwall) (LD)]

The hon. Member is giving an impassioned speech about areas that are underserved by rail connections. My constituency is one such areas—it does not have a single mainline station, despite being the largest constituency by land in Cornwall. Unfortunately, the North Cornwall railway was a victim of the Beeching cuts. Will the hon. Member ask the Minister how the Bill will help such areas to bring back vital rail links? There are initiatives such as Kernow Connect, which has the potential to connect my constituency at Launceston, but does the hon. Member agree that the Bill does not go far enough in that regard?

[Steve Witherden]

The hon. Member serves a similarly large and rural constituency to mine. Getting stations open in such areas is incredibly important, and I urge him to work closely with community groups, as I am sure he is already doing, so that what I am trying to do in mid and north Wales might also be done in Cornwall.

Great British Railways presents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to rebuild our railways and create a service that works for the public good rather than for private profit. Workers must not be sidelined; jobs, pensions and trade union rights must be protected; and passengers must see genuine improvements in affordability and reliability.

[Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab)]

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

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

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