← Back to House of Commons Debates
Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill - Clause 1 - Prohibition on franchise extensions and new franchises
19 November 2024
Lead MP
Louise Haigh
Debate Type
Bill Debate
Tags
EconomyTransport
Other Contributors: 11
At a Glance
Louise Haigh raised concerns about passenger railway services (public ownership) bill - clause 1 - prohibition on franchise extensions and new franchises in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
I am delighted that the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill has returned to this House. The Government was elected with a manifesto commitment to bring train services back into public ownership, addressing inefficiency and waste. Lords amendment 1 seeks to insert a purpose clause in the Bill and requires me to have regard to it, but I argue that improving performance is already my top priority without such a clause. Furthermore, Lords amendment 2 would delay the programme of transfers into public ownership, prolonging the current franchising system which has caused significant misery for passengers.
Nusrat Ghani
Con
Sussex Weald
I must draw attention to financial privilege being engaged by Lords amendment 2. If that amendment is agreed, I will cause a customary entry waiving Commons financial privilege to be entered in the Journal.
Louise Haigh
Lab
Sheffield Heeley
The Government opposes Lords amendment 1 as it is unnecessary, misleading, and potentially harmful. Amendment 2 would delay public ownership transfers and prolong the current franchising system which has inflicted misery on passengers, thus the House should oppose it.
Gareth Bacon
Con
Orpington
Argues that Lords amendments put passengers at the heart of decision-making, requiring actions to improve their experience. He emphasises the public's desire for improved services and criticises the Government's use of selective performance data.
Andy McDonald
Lab
Middlesbrough and Thornaby East
Supports the Bill but opposes Lords amendment 2. Argues that the point is to take all franchises into public ownership, not just the worst-performing ones. Criticises past performance of private operators and advocates for moving towards public control with minimal cost.
Paul Kohler
Lib Dem
Wimbledon
Supports Lords amendment 1, which requires the Secretary of State to improve passenger railway services. Emphasises that nationalisation alone will not solve all issues and calls for scrutiny of forthcoming rail reform Bill.
Jacob Collier
Lab
Burton and Uttoxeter
Supports the Government motion to disagree with the Lords amendment but does not specify a stance on Lords amendment 1. Argues for public ownership of rail franchises, highlighting benefits such as reinvestment in services and infrastructure.
Andrew Snowden
Con
Fylde
Supports Lords amendment 2, which ranks franchise agreements by performance and nationalises franchises starting with the worst. Argues that this pragmatic approach puts passengers at the heart of the Bill.
Zöe Franklin
Lib Dem
Guildford
The accessibility of public transport is crucial. Lords amendment 3 on the public sector equality duty is excellent, and step-free access improves service for all users including disabled people, parents with buggies, cyclists, and more. It leads to a greener future by reducing road traffic.
Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey
The SNP supports the Bill and Government’s position on Lords amendments. Improvements such as Inverness Airport station open up the railway to more people but define what constitutes performance improvement carefully. Public funds should be reinvested into railways, acknowledging governance has improved since privatisation.
Derby North
Lords amendment 3 on public sector equality duty is transformative and ensures accountability for accessibility needs. Encourage working with rolling stock manufacturers to modernise trains for future generations, inspiring industry and international standards.
Louise Haigh
Lab
Sheffield Heeley
Echoing frustration with Opposition's position on performance. The Bill is a step towards reform, putting passengers first. Emphasises Government’s White Paper objectives for reliability, affordability, efficiency, quality, accessibility and safety.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.