Passenger Railway Services Bill - Committee Stage

[LNW-GW Joint]

Back from their hols, the Commons will debate the Passenger Rail Services Bill today.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0003/240003.pdf

Edit Sept 9: The format of the linked parliamentary bill, which consists of edits to existing legislation, makes it impossible to extract a meaningful quote.
A summary, which is public knowledge, is that passenger service contracts will now be awarded to the pubic sector by default, with the DfT only awarding short-term private sector contracts in emergency.
This reverses the legislation in the 1993 Railways Act, which mandated private sector contracts except in emergency.

This short Bill amounts to the formal renationalisation of passenger services, by directing the DfT and devolved administrations to award contracts to public sector operators except in emergency.
This is the reverse of current legislation which directs DfT to award contracts to the private sector, except in emergency where DfT's DOLR takes on short term contracts.
Today is the Committee stage hearing with the whole house as the committee, and will be led by SoS Louise Haigh.
Timing isn't entirely clear, but I would guess it will be from around 1230, after the Chancellor's question session.

Parliamentlive.tv

House of Commons

www.parliamentlive.tv

These events are sometimes underwhelming, but there's a chance the veil of secrecy on the intended structure and management of the nationalised railway (ie GBR) will emerge from the proceedings.
There should also be an update on the legislative timetable for GBR itself to be established.
The main media will be taking a keen interest for all sorts of reasons, which I expect will be mostly about which TOC private owners will be first to be invited to hand their keys back, and when.
Once the committee stage is complete, the Bill will pass to the Lords, where I imagine Lord Hendy will be the sponsor.

 

[KM1991]

The main media will be taking a keen interest for all sorts of reasons, which I expect will be mostly about which TOC private owners will be first to be invited to hand their keys back, and when.

Moneys on GTR April 2025 being the first in line.

 

[jackdoyle]

Timing isn't entirely clear, but I would guess it will be from around 1230, after the Chancellor's question session.

Earliest would be 12:30, later if there are urgent questions or statements.
Timings agreed give up to four hours for committee stage and up to five hours from the start for all of today's stages (committee, consideration and third reading)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Sep 2024 ==

Ed Miliband making a statement in the house so committee will start 13:15/13:30ish.
EDIT: and two urgent questions announced so can't see committee starting before 15:00.

 

[geoffk]

Is the Bill likely to have cross-party support (i.e. all except the Tories, DUP and Reform)?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is the Bill likely to have cross-party support (i.e. all except the Tories, DUP and Reform)?

That depends on whether the opposition forces a vote or not.
It might be nodded through, though I imagine the Tories will want to take this early opportunity to delay matters for the new government.
There could well be a lot of lobbying of local rail interests on all sides, typically over through services to London, or service quality.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The debate opens.
Opposition led by shadow Helen Whately, former Heath Minister.
Making a reasonable case for greater controls on the public TOCs.
Backbench contributions generally feeble (as thy generally are).
Louise Haigh has not spoken yet.
The Evening Standard is reporting the a Shadow GBR has been set up, but no details and no announcement from DfT.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Graham Stringer (a long-term member of the TSC and critic of Avanti) pointing out the paradox that Avanti is failing because of restrictive agreements with Aslef, just as the SoS has settled the Aslef dispute without any changes to terms and conditions.
A it of an own goal, I think.

Too much being made of exporting UK rail profits to EU state-owned railways.
I don't think any of the EU bodies think they made much out of its UK activity.

 

[OneOfThe48]

Moneys on GTR April 2025 being the first in line.

Why not start with GA and WMT as their contracts are reaching the end of their ‘core term’ this month? Though they’ll need to wait for the Bill to pass first of course

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The left-wing back-benchers want the ROSCOs to be abolished, or bypassed.
That is not part of the current bill, but does represent another "taking money out of the industry" view.
Much was made of exporting profits abroad.
Had to laugh when they demanded direct orders by GBR for Alstom and Hitachi (the well-known British companies) instead.

Now having to listen to a (very impressive) maiden speech by a Sheffield MP - with zero railway content.

 

[43066]

Graham Stringer (a long-term member of the TSC and critic of Avanti) pointing out the paradox that Avanti is failing because of restrictive agreements with Aslef,

Many of Avanti’s Ts and Cs (eg spare weeks where rest days could be changed, 12 hour spare movements etc.) seemed to be the inspiration for last government’s wish list of changes to Ts and Cs. That rather implies that any suggestion that Avanti is failing because of agreements with ASLEF is completely untrue.

 

[SCDR_WMR]

Many of Avanti’s Ts and Cs (eg spare weeks where rest days could be changed, 12 hour spare movements etc.) seemed to be the inspiration for last government’s wish list of changes to Ts and Cs. That rather implies that any suggestion that Avanti is failing because of agreements with ASLEF is completely untrue.

Exactly, it's not their terms that are the problem.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Now in a seemingly endless sequence of maiden speeches, each about 10 minutes long and next to nothing to do with rail.
At the same time, the very personal speeches are individually interesting and impressive.
But it does extend the debate significantly.
Louise Haigh has yet to respond to the amendments and possibly give extra information on the GBR setup.

In the meantime DfT has announced the setup of GBR with leadership as noted above (Alex Hynes from DfT, Andrew Haines from NR and Robin Gisby from DOLR).

Transport Secretary fires the starting gun on rail reform as Public Ownership Bill reaches final stages in Commons

Government to prioritise passengers over private companies and reverse decades of delays, cancellations and unreliable services on Britain’s railways.

www.gov.uk

Establishing a Shadow Great British Railways

Government will begin delivering improvements for rail passengers and freight users straight away.

www.gov.uk

These announcements say nothing at all about GBR's structure and methods.
Essentially the same rather vague statements about fares reform and passenger focus are mentioned.
The only new item I can see is a focus on improving driver training.
The three named leaders are expected to work collaboratively to improve the railway.

I will expect Shadow Great British Railways to be passenger focused and unlock barriers to delivery. I will also expect it to work alongside my team and I with rail stakeholders and partners across Great Britain, including national and regional governments, mayors, the trade unions, train operators, passenger and freight representative groups, the supply chain, the regulator and railway staff to deliver improvements. As part of the plans for reform, this includes the need to speed up training for drivers and collaborate with the sector to build resilience and improve productivity.

Oh and there will be a 50% Rail Sale next year.

 

[CAF397]

The left-wing back-benchers want the ROSCOs to be abolished, or bypassed.

Wouldn't that pass the cost of rolling stock onto the Government's books? Depreciation and replacement?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Now in a seemingly endless sequence of maiden speeches, each about 10 minutes long and next to nothing to do with rail.
At the same time, the very personal speeches are individually interesting and impressive.
But it does extend the debate significantly.
Louise Haigh has yet to respond to the amendments and possibly give extra information on the GBR setup.

In the meantime DfT has announced the setup of GBR with leadership as noted above (Alex Hynes from DfT, Andrew Haines from NR and Robin Gisby from DOLR).

Transport Secretary fires the starting gun on rail reform as Public Ownership Bill reaches final stages in Commons

Government to prioritise passengers over private companies and reverse decades of delays, cancellations and unreliable services on Britain’s railways.

www.gov.uk

Establishing a Shadow Great British Railways

Government will begin delivering improvements for rail passengers and freight users straight away.

www.gov.uk

These announcements say nothing at all about GBR's structure and methods.
Essentially the same rather vague statements about fares reform and passenger focus are mentioned.
The only new item I can see is a focus on improving driver training.
The three named leaders are expected to work collaboratively to improve the railway.

Those three should be work collaboratively now if they were serious about improving the industry so what does she think is going to change. Somebody needs to appointed to run GBR with a clear remit and powers to quickly assemble at least a high level organisation otherwise its all bluster

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Now they are into voting on 4 conservative amendments, which I imagine will be rejected by large majorities.
The substantive ministerial response was given by junior minister Stephen Lightwood, probably because the Rail Minister Peter Hendy is a Lord.
Louise Haigh has not said a word beyond an early riposte about pay negotiations with the unions.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Too much being made of exporting UK rail profits to EU state-owned railways.
I don't think any of the EU bodies think they made much out of its UK activity.

Agreed. Makes a good story with the unions- fat cats etc -but not much money in it at all.

 

[Toby268]

Now they are into voting on 4 conservative amendments, which I imagine will be rejected by large majorities.
The substantive ministerial response was given by junior minister Stephen Lightwood, probably because the Rail Minister Peter Hendy is a Lord.
Louise Haigh has not said a word beyond an early riposte about pay negotiations with the unions.

What are the 4 amendments?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

What are the 4 amendments?

If you can make sense of the 11 pages of amendments perhaps you can work it out!

Scroll down to amendment section

https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3732/publications

 

[Horizon22]

The left-wing back-benchers want the ROSCOs to be abolished, or bypassed.
That is not part of the current bill, but does represent another "taking money out of the industry"

Im not sure how that could they could just be “bypassed”. And if the government has a few spare £billions to spend on ROSCOs then I’m sure they’d sell! It’s definitely taking money out but undoing this aspect of privitisation is going to prove very difficult, if not impossible with the financial constraints.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Im not sure how that could they could just be “bypassed”. And if the government has a few spare £billions to spend on ROSCOs then I’m sure they’d sell! It’s definitely taking money out but undoing this aspect of privitisation is going to prove very difficult, if not impossible with the financial constraints.

Totally unaffordable given the amount of new stock built over last five years but doesn't prevent a progressive realignment to govt funded stock going forward albeit would be decades before the ROSCO were eliminated.

 

[irp]

What are the 4 amendments?

One was an amendment to have a public pay body to advise on pay increases (I assume similar to other public sectors). That one got defeated - I happened to catch it on BBC Parliament

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Finally ended after 1935, so a 6-hour debate.
The opposition amendments were all defeated by large majorities.
Louise Haigh finally rose to sum up and as you would expect gave a robust and somewhat triumphant summary of what the Bill would achieve.
She confirmed the setup of Shadow GBR and expects early progress on improvements.
And with that the Bill got its third reading and now progresses to the Lords.

 

[Ashfordian6]

One was an amendment to have a public pay body to advise on pay increases (I assume similar to other public sectors). That one got defeated - I happened to catch it on BBC Parliament

Isn't that going to happen by default when GBR take over the TOC's?

That will mean GBR, a public body will be negotiating pay increases.

 

[irp]

Isn't that going to happen by default when GBR take over the TOC's?

That will mean GBR, a public body will be negotiating pay increases.

The way I heard it (and I was not paying 100% attention tbh - one does have to work!), under the amendment it would be independent to GBR, similar to existing arrangements for various other public sector services.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Isn't that going to happen by default when GBR take over the TOC's?
That will mean GBR, a public body will be negotiating pay increases.

The amendment was defeated, but would have meant some third party oversight of the pay round.
BR never had such a process, often using ACAS to settle disputes, but GBR will have to set up a reasonably transparent process as it can't all be done behind closed doors any more.
The unions have had 28 years of being able to play of one part of the privatised industry off against another - that will all vanish.
Pay review bodies were all about matching pay rises with similar jobs in other public sectors.
That's quite hard with rail.
There will still be private sector comparisons with the open access TOCs, and the devolved authorities will probably still be different (TfW, TfL etc).

 

[Horizon22]

Totally unaffordable given the amount of new stock built over last five years but doesn't prevent a progressive realignment to govt funded stock going forward albeit would be decades before the ROSCO were eliminated.

Yes for new stock it could be achievable if they are willing to accept the capital costs.

 

[Geeves]

As said there's many orders going in in the next few years that could be covered directly by the public purse Vs the current scheme where tax bill still pays and then by proxy pay for Canadian teachers retirement plans via the Rosco

My own question would be has DOHL gone and the TOCs under it now running under Shadow GBR?

Edit I found the answer to my own question. The remaining 10 TOCs will all come under the remit of DOHL.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

My own question would be has DOHL gone and the TOCs under it now running under Shadow GBR?
Edit I found the answer to my own question. The remaining 10 TOCs will all come under the remit of DOHL.

Until GBR has a legal basis to take them on.

In yesterday's debate the Tories were accused of selling the BR rolling stock off for less than it was worth.
That was because Labour noisily said it would reverse the sell-off if elected, which depressed the sale price.
They didn't reverse privatisation, until now.

If abolished, half the ROSCO function would migrate to GBR, the other half to the manufacturers.
The cost of borrowing the money for rolling stock would still have to be paid.
BR was severely rationed for its annual capital spend on rolling stock.

 

[MPW]

Could GBR have its own bankruptcy remote ROSCO, where 3rd party capital can invest but GBR maintains some control either through majority ownership or regulation which controls dividends?

How does equity investment impact government books currently? Does it show as a cost, or is there a separate accounting classification for investment where some return is expected?

If you can't tell, I work in finance, not rail industry.

 

[Snow1964]

Could GBR have its own bankruptcy remote ROSCO, where 3rd party capital can invest but GBR maintains some control either through majority ownership or regulation which controls dividends?

How does equity investment impact government books currently? Does it show as a cost, or is there a separate accounting classification for investment where some return is expected?

If you can't tell, I work in finance, not rail industry.

Reading the Simon Lightwood undersecretary of State summing up (near the end just after 6:15pm timestamp), there is a reference to DfT being in active discussion with Eurofima (the Swiss based rail financing company).

This suggests to me they want to bring in foreign financing to put pressure on the (very) profitable ROSCOs, alternatively get some other parts of the railway off the Government balance sheet

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-09-03/debates/02C446B7-48AC-4E02-8BAD-FA67E7530326/PassengerRailwayServices(PublicOwnership)Bill