Great Western Coffee Shop

Labour’s vision is to deliver a unified and simplified rail system that relentlessly focuses on securing improved services for passengers and better value for money for taxpayers.

As Secretary of State, I won’t be running the operation of the railways day to day, but I will be the passenger-in-chief, setting the strategy to improve our railways and making sure it delivers against our six key objectives:
1. Reliable – so that people can have confidence in their journey, whether it’s a one-off trip or their daily commute.
2. Affordable – so that prices are kept, wherever possible, at a point that works for both passengers and taxpayers.
3. Efficient – so that people know that their journey will be as straightforward as possible, from booking to travel, and to provide better value for the travelling public and taxpayer alike.
4. Quality – so that passengers have the service experience they have a right to expect.
5. Accessible – so that our railways are available for everyone to use.
6. Safe – so that people don’t worry about their safety on the railway and are not in fear of accidents or crime while travelling.

I was alarmed to see that the first specific improvement listed under “Labour’s vision for passengers” is: “Automatic delay and cancellation refunds”. Britain’s rail passengers are not looking for easier ways to get their money back – they want delays and cancellations to be reduced. Tackling the symptoms rather than the causes is not good enough.

Ms Haigh also promises “a best fare guarantee for passengers”. That’s more like it: ensuring nobody pays more than they need to. Those of us who depend on the railway want to see it succeed commercially.

For that to happen, more people need to be attracted to trains. Besides making rail more reliable, the best way to lure people back is to bestow confidence they are getting the best deal. And the only way to do that is a comprehensive overhaul of the fares system.

Otherwise, the government would be in the embarrassing position of having to hand back cash to every passenger who, for example, foolishly buys a Bristol-London ticket rather than “splitting” the journey at Didcot Parkway.

For decades the “Didcot Dodge” has been a fixture on the Great Western Railway. So long as the Bristol-London train stops at the Oxfordshire junction (and most do), passengers typically save 40 per cent. Countless other anomalies need fixing.

The biggest promise of all from the transport shadow: “Saving billions of pounds for taxpayers every year.” We really need to know how that will be done. At the heart of Britain’s railway woes: the shocking state of infrastructure. We need more investment, not less.

I wonder how much all the TOCs▸ management fees add up to in any given year - they'll start saving those.

I also wonder whether, if Labour do succeed, and confirmation of this plan is in the King's speech, the TOCs might start to hand in their keys early - weighing whether that fee is worth chasing over running their contract.

I wonder how much all the TOCs management fees add up to in any given year - they'll start saving those.

I also wonder whether, if Labour do succeed, and confirmation of this plan is in the King's speech, the TOCs might start to hand in their keys early - weighing whether that fee is worth chasing over running their contract.

"Get Britain Moving - Labour's plans to fix Britain's Railways"

Document at
https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/GETTING-BRITAIN-MOVING-Labours-Plan-to-Fix-Britains-Railways.pdf

Mirrored on the Coffee Shop for posterity (or at least as long as there is coffee!!) at http://www.passenger.chat/mirror/GETTING-BRITAIN-MOVING-Labours-Plan-to-Fix-Britains-Railways.pdf
and I have "whitelisted" it so that guests as well as members can access it.

With Labour having a strong chance of becoming the government in a few weeks, this document might well be an important pointer to the future.  Past form of all governments is to veer away from aspirations published in the lead up to elections, so "we will see".

In the introduction, Shadow Transport Minister Louise Haigh writes:


The document - totalling some 28 pages - criticises the current setup / situation and suggests / describes mechanisms with which the would / might be addressed.

And no doubt Louise Haigh will be the sole judge of their performance!

Great British Railways will not be marking its own homework. Alongside the accountability measures available to the Secretary of State to drive improvements for passengers, and continued safety regulation by the Office of Rail and Road, a powerful new passenger watchdog – the Passenger Standards Authority – will independently monitor standards and champion improvement in service performance against a range of measures.

The new watchdog will consolidate the customer-focused regulatory and other functions of the Office of Rail and Road, Transport Focus and the Rail Ombudsman to bring a relentless focus within one independent body in the interests of rail passengers, alongside its responsibilities for other parts of the transport system.
In terms of rail, it will have the power to demand service improvement plans, inspect the performance of Great British Railways with information gathering powers and assess performance fairly and transparently against published data.

[snip]

By bringing these functions and expertise together, passengers will have a one-stop- shop where their interests are protected, where they can get advice, have unresolved complaints addressed and where rights and standards are monitored and reported publicly and transparently.

And Louise Haigh is, as expected, now Transport Secretary.

With Lord Hendy as the rail Minister

Peter

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ministerial-appointments-july-2024

Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill CBE as a Minister of State in the Department for Transport

Now a new head for Network Rail is required.

Now a new head for Network Rail is required.

Minister refuses to rule out resurrecting northern leg of HS2

Darren Jones says Labour will have ‘conversation’ about alternative proposals for future of high-speed route

A Treasury minister has refused to rule out resurrecting the HS2 railway line north of Birmingham.

Darren Jones, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, said Labour would have a “conversation” with Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, about the future of the high-speed route after the northern leg was scrapped by Rishi Sunak.

Mr Burnham announced in February this year that he was exploring a number of alternative options to the section ditched by the Tories, including a proposal for a new, lower-speed line roughly along the same route.

In an interview with Sky News on Monday morning, Mr Jones was told that Mr Burnham “wants HS2 reinstated”.

He replied: “I am sure Andy Burnham will have lots of things on his agenda. We will have to talk to Andy Burnham about that. I know that he was working with some other private investors and other mayors to put together proposals.”

Asked if he was ruling it out, Mr Jones said: “We are going to collaborate with our mayors and devolved leaders, we are going to work with them on the local growth plans…

“We are not going to be able to do everything and there is going to be difficult trade-offs and we have inherited a very difficult fiscal situation, that is clear.

“But we can do things to start with and then of course if there are medium and long-term aspirations we will work with partners to deliver them.”

Asked again if he was ruling it out, Mr Jones said: “We will have the conversation with the mayor and see what his proposals are.”

Mr Sunak scrapped the northern leg of HS2 between Birmingham and Manchester in October 2023.

Setting out possible alternatives in February, together with Andy Street, now the former Tory mayor of the West Midlands, Mr Burnham presented three options drawing on private funds, which were all said to cost “considerably less” than HS2.

As well as the new, lower speed line, which would be mostly for passengers, these included enhancing the existing West Coast Main Line and adding bypasses to the busiest sections.

At the time, Mr Burnham said that a “do nothing” approach was “not an option” because that would be “damaging to economic growth in the regions” and “leave the UK with quite a serious transport headache for the rest of this century”.

The mayors did not provide any cost estimates.

When he announced the axing of the HS2 northern leg, Mr Sunak promised to reinvest “every single penny” of the £36 billion previously earmarked for the scheme into hundreds of new transport projects.

The decision to scrap the section was criticised by Lord Cameron and Boris Johnson, who accused Mr Sunak of throwing away a “once-in-a-generation opportunity”.

HS2 was not mentioned by name in the Labour manifesto. However, the party did vow to improve rail connectivity “across the north of England”.

"Head" as in a Chair rather than a Chief Executive. And that's if NR is to remain an entity with a board rather than be consumed by GBR.   Who might the Coffee Shop team suggest? 

Don't we have, hidden amongst our members and guests who read the forum, a number of passenger / customer service people who might just be able to do a good job ... especially if the constraints and frustrations "enjoyed" by their predecessor in recent years could be set aside. With their predecessor now a Minister of State at the DfT, surely this should now be much more a team game?

And until that happens? Probably at least a year, possibly two?

•     improving performance on the railways and driving forward rail reform
•     improving bus services and growing usage across the country
•     transforming infrastructure to work for the whole country, promoting social mobility and tackling regional inequality
•     delivering greener transport
•     better integrating transport networks

In addition, the Prime Minister has announced the appointment of new ministers at the Department, including Future of Roads Minister Lilian Greenwood MP, Local Transport Minister Simon Lightwood MP, and Aviation, Maritime, and Security Minister Mike Kane MP.

It may be they pass to the OLR, before being passed to GBR once established....

He owns two Routemasters, used in the annual scheduled number 23A services to Imber. He doesn't own a train, but I think he will prove a good leader for rail generally - as head of NR, I am sure he had to bite his lip and do what he was told to do by the Minister on occasion. As Minister, he won't have to do that. He might not be the same sort of visionary as Andrew Adonis, but they sing from the same hymn book. Time will tell.

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

Do you agree with Hendy when he says that the railway could be run more effectively with less people?

If I were a TOC back-office staffer - say in delay attribution - I think I'd be keeping a beady eye open on the job market.

Route control is another where there is both TOC and NR staff duplicating what was done by one in BR and big 4 days, time table planning, access planning also duplicated

Hendy also cited in the same context working practices dating back to the age of steam, which may well bear scrutiny, and logically it wouldn't be too surprising if the ticket office closure programme was resurrected, perhaps on a smaller scale?

Perhaps not until ticketing is simplified?
There are some of us here who use a ticket office!

There was yet another railway piece in the last Sunday Times - or rather two. One was a largely fact-free bit of nostalgia really, based on Royal Mail's intention to decommission its mail EMUs. But that news story is itself less than meets the eye (and not in a press release).

The front-page banner article on the business bit was headlined "Labour mulls plan to hire 100,000 railworkers as staffing crisis looms". Its source was  given as"draft summary findings .... seen by the Sunday Times", referring to a Rail and Urban Transport Review for the Labour team, conducted by Jürgen Maier (ex Siemens UK boss). However, the snippets quoted don't really add up - is that 100,000 really an increase in headcount, or just to replace the 50,000  who will retire by 2030 plus other leavers (both are said)?

One other quote picks up that new recruits these days are rarely under 25, without explaining why employing older workers is a bad thing. I do hope that Even Newer Labour have grown out of the idea that creating jobs is a good thing in itself - rather than first finding things that need doing, and then making sure we have people who can do them.

The government may need to deliberately put people off travelling between Birmingham and Manchester by rail because scrapping HS2’s northern leg is likely to mean trains can take fewer passengers.

New HS2 trains will travel to Manchester on existing tracks but they will have less space than current services, according to a report by the public spending watchdog.

The National Audit Office (NAO) said the government could need to manage demand by “incentivising people to travel at different times or to not travel by rail”.

The NAO's report also stated that the previous Conservative government had spent £592m buying up land and property along now-cancelled parts of the route.

Last October, then-Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced that sections of the high-speed railway linking Birmingham with Manchester and with the East Midlands would no longer be built.

It means that only the stretch between London and the West Midlands will go ahead. New trains built for HS2, however, will run over the entire line.

But the NAO said these trains “may have fewer seats than existing services”, and HS2’s delivery company estimates that capacity between Manchester and Birmingham could be reduced by 17%.

The Department for Transport (DfT) is looking at how longer HS2 trains could be used, but existing stations such as Crewe would have to be adapted.

As a result, the NAO said that the DfT “will need to assess options for addressing capacity issues on the west coast”, such as dissuading passengers from travelling by train at certain times - if at all.

But the report warned that this may constrain economic growth and increase environmental costs.

Another option would be “improving or adding infrastructure”, but this could be expensive and disruptive.

"It’s long been clear that the Conservatives recklessly mismanaged HS2 and allowed the costs to spiral entirely out of control – but this report lays bare the scale of their mistakes," Labour's new Transport Secretary Louise Haigh said.

The NAO report also said that disposing of the land and property bought along the northern leg of the route could take several years, although some may be needed for other transport projects such as Northern Powerhouse Rail.

The recent King's Speech included a High Speed Rail Bill, which had previously been tabled to build HS2's northern leg.

The new government said it would not revive HS2's cancelled sections but repurpose the bill to bring in powers to build new rail infrastructure in northern England.

"We are reviewing this report’s findings, alongside the position we have inherited on HS2 and wider transport infrastructure and will set out next steps in due course," Ms Haigh said.

“Transport is an essential part of our mission to rebuild Britain – and we're committed to delivering infrastructure that works for the whole country."

Last October, when the northern leg was scrapped, the then government said that a terminus at Euston would go ahead but only with private funding.

If HS2 did not reach Euston, passengers would have to change at Old Oak Common in west London to reach the capital’s centre.

The authors of the NAO report said there would be more costs to come on top of the cancellation, which is expected to take three years and cost £100m.

Some work will be done even though it is no longer required.

For example, only three platforms will now be needed at Birmingham Curzon Street, but the full seven will be built because it would cost more to cancel.

Since 2020, construction costs have increased by £6.1bn.

The NAO report says the DfT and HS2 Ltd are finalising a "lowest cost action plan" to try to reduce costs, particularly through trying to renegotiate contracts.

A spokesperson for HS2 Ltd said: “This is a project of unprecedented scale and complexity and the cancellation of Phase 2 has increased our cost challenges."

Reasons include the budget and schedule being set too early, delays to planning consent and the impact of external events such as the Covid-19 pandemic.

And finally, forget any more rail re-openings after the ‘low hanging fruit’ of Okehampton, Levenmouth and, (coming this Autumn), Ashington. The costs involved in schemes such as Portishead simply cannot be justified. They’d fund an alternative gold plated, high frequency bus network operating with free travel for a generation … which brings us back to …. the Better Buses Bill.

Hmm, not sure I liked Roger French's final para:

Is he related in any way to the Roger French OBE who used to be the managing director of Brighton and Hove Bus and Coach Company? If so, he may be biased in favour of having people from a large conurbation spending the first hour or more of their working day sitting in late buses on the A369.

Perhaps not until ticketing is simplified?
There are some of us here who use a ticket office!

Big "thank you" to out transport scholars who have helped me sort out in my own mind what Nationalisation really means ... I have updated my article to reflect inputs and you can find it shared at

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rail-nationalisation-solution-graham-ellis-pvn3e
and
http://grahamellis.uk/blog1309.html

It's also flagged on my personal Facebook page, which is at
https://www.facebook.com/graham.ellis.melksham/

I am still waiting for someone to explain to me (reasonably succinctly), what positive difference(s) nationalising the railways (the bits that aren't already nationalised) will make to the railway's customers?

There are some of us here who use a ticket office!

I am still waiting for someone to explain to me (reasonably succinctly), what positive difference(s) nationalising the railways (the bits that aren't already nationalised) will make to the railway's customers?

Monies being diverted from the pockets of the Directors of GWR into the pockets of civil servants

I hope you didn't mean that TG. The shareholders of First Group will be the ones primarily benefitting from any profits from the current system (but also taking any losses - see GWR's 2020/2021 accounts), and the beneficiary of any saving will ultimately be the Treasury.

It should simply be reducing the net cost of subsidising our railway system. But as has already been aired, the proportion of costs that is actually saved is not likely to be that material. If I ruled the world it would go towards electrifying Didcot to Oxford, but it may not even reach Appleford.

It's still wrong though, isn't it? Not one civil servant will make any additional monies from this nationalisation

(Sighs deeply).........OK......to be clear......I didn't mean that Civil Servants will be personally enriched, my meaning was that rather than Company Directors being paid, the money will be going to Civil Servants who will presumably be staffing the new quango that is GBR which has has already cost the taxpayer North of £50 million......and returning to my original point, I'm unclear as to how that reallocation of resources fundamentally improves the outlook for the customer waiting on the platform......

Everyone is jumping to conclusions ...

[snip]

The Labour Government changes to the UK railways will be as much if not more of a fundamental change to the UK railways as the changes made by John Major's Conservative Government privatisation in the 1990's; GBR legislation will not be just a simple "brining in train operation in house"

Are you suggesting that there would be more civil servants than current staffing? Surely strip out the complex contracts and you need less staff.

….perhaps one day my curiosity will be satisfied..........I am sure there must be something worth £50 million?

You would hope there would be far less expensive bureaucracy in the circumstances you describe however civil servants tend to expand to fill any gap, and reading Electric trains subsequent comments which, if come to pass, suggest at least as much if not more complexity in the system, I wouldn't be so sure!

Naturally I defer to your knowledge of your own small area of the Civil Service prior to your retirement however as a whole, Civil service numbers now stand at over half a million, a rise of over 100,000 FTE in the last decade (including rises in the numbers employed by the DWP) . Not something which is indicative of a "lean" institution, given (as you allude to) advances in technology etc.

The report itself: is this it?

Mark

https://www.urbantransportgroup.org/resources/types/report/rail-and-urban-transport-review (https://www.urbantransportgroup.org/resources/types/report/rail-and-urban-transport-review)

There are two reports out there - the one just published late last week that you refer to (42 pages), and the one from the Labour Party prior to this thread (28 pages).   I have mirrored them both for Coffee Shop members

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/mirror/GETTING-BRITAIN-MOVING-Labours-Plan-to-Fix-Britains-Railways.pdf
and
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/mirror/Rail_urban_government.pdf

Sir Keir Starmer was last night accused of fast-tracking his flagship transport policy of re-nationalising the railways to please his union 'paymasters'.

In a highly unusual move, ministers have chosen to bypass the traditional process such laws go through when MPs debate it in the Commons next week.

Rather than being scrutinised by a Public Bill Committee, the Government has opted for a Committee of the Whole House.

It means the law to re-nationalise the railways, a long-held demand of union bosses, can pass weeks and possibly even months quicker.

The fast-track measure is usually reserved for emergency legislation, such as during the Covid-19 pandemic when it was used to bring in social distancing rules speedily. It is also used following budgets so that tax and spending changes can happen quickly.

This month the Government handed train drivers a 14.25 per cent pay hike, over three years, only for their Aslef union to call fresh strikes 48 hours later.

It emerged last night that the Government has offered the militant RMT the same as Aslef. It means guards and station staff will get a 4.75 per cent hike for last year and 4.5 per cent this year.

It came as the PM was also accused of prioritising the demands of the unions over passengers after figures showed delays on lines that have already been re-nationalised are more than twice as bad.

Analysis of official data shows there was an average of 136,328 minutes of delays on lines run by private train firms last year.

But for those already back in public ownership, there were 311,202 minutes on average per operator – the equivalent of 216 extra days of delays.

Meanwhile, lines which have already been brought into public ownership have been hit with 50 per cent more strike action.

Tuesday Sep 3rd - Main business: The Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill will go through Committee of the Whole House and all its remaining stages in the House of Commons. This is the first opportunity for MPs to propose amendments to the legislation that will bring railways back into public ownership.

The Conservative Shadow Transport Secretary, Helen Whately, has put down a set of amendments requiring the Secretary of State to: publish a series of regular reports on the expected impact and cost of the Bill’s provisions; impose a duty on the new public sector operators to invest in innovation and to consider the needs of passengers before making changes to service levels; subject the new public sector operators to performance-based assessments; and establish a pay review body for employees of the new public sector companies.

Liberal Democrat amendments would establish an independent body to advise the Secretary of State on new public sector contracts and require an annual report on the impact of public sector contracts on ticketing arrangements. The Greens have also put down amendments to enable public sector contracts to be owned by local elected public bodies.

The Conservative amendments are those most likely to be selected by the Speaker.

Figures show how rail punctuality has been in decline since last Labour PM, with Sunak’s tenure a recent low

As commuters return en masse after summer holidays next week, the political omens – and the data – afford some hope that a new Labour government may change rail for the better. Say what you like about Gordon Brown, but at least he made the trains run on time.

Analysis of official statistics throughout the tenure of the last seven prime ministers show that punctuality was highest, on average, under the last Labour PM in power.

The public performance measure (PPM) for punctuality, published every four weeks by the industry, measures trains as punctual if they arrive within five minutes of schedule for commuter services, or within 10 minutes for long-distance trains.

As an average, the PM with the best PPM was Brown, with punctuality of 90.5% during his 2007-10 premiership.

Train punctuality remained high in the early years of the coalition government but faded from 2013, enough to make David Cameron’s 2010 to 2016 tenure marginally second best.

Timekeeping has been on a downward path ever since, with Theresa May’s years in charge coinciding with the 2018 timetable fiasco and associated disruption. Under Rishi Sunak, only 85.5% of trains ran on time and many more failed to run at all, with reduced schedules and advance cancellations, partly due to strikes and the national pay dispute that rumbled on during his watch.

The early part of Boris Johnson’s premiership had record periodic highs for punctuality – albeit in a time when services were reduced due to the pandemic and the rail industry could more or less run trains unencumbered by people commuting or travelling.

The record-breaking four-week period when 97.2% trains ran on time came in April 2020, much of which Johnson spent in hospital with Covid, allowing Dominic Raab, briefly de facto acting PM, to claim a share of the glory. As it was the height of lockdown, there were, however, virtually no passengers onboard.

The lowest average and lowest periodic figures were recorded under the premiership of Tony Blair, who inherited Railtrack, the newly privatised railway infrastructure manager that was blamed for some of the worst disasters in UK rail history. Punctuality fell to 57.4% in late 2001, with speed restrictions following the Hatfield crash. It had returned to above 90% in Blair’s last months in office.

The rail historian Christian Wolmar said of the figures: “It probably reflects the decline in investment over the last decade. And given Sunak barely even took the train, and with a transport secretary more interested in the culture wars than running the trains on time, it’s not surprising things have got worse.

“It’s not going to be easy for Keir Starmer to reverse that, but the first thing to do is sort out the industrial relations.”

Starmer’s government appears to have settled the long-running pay dispute with drivers, pending a ballot of Aslef members, although the threatened strikes at LNER, now suspended, suggest it may not be entirely smooth. Labour meanwhile announced immediate legislation to nationalise train operations and set up the state-owned Great British Railways. No official data is yet available for Starmer’s time in office.

Industry body the Rail Delivery Group said it measured performance via changes in the annual average figure from the regulator, which was highest at 93.4% in 2020-21, when fewer trains ran during Covid and less than a quarter of the normal passengers travelled.

A spokesperson said: “We know how important reliability and punctuality is to customers. Train companies work hard to maintain as many services as possible, but delays can occur due to various factors, like weather and flooding, industrial action, infrastructure issues such as track or signalling faults, train faults and external incidents such as trespass.”

They added that “a number of cross-industry groups are working to find solutions to some of the main reasons why trains are delayed”.

A Department for Transport spokesperson said: “The secretary of state has been clear that rail performance across the country is at an unacceptable low.

“We will take all operators into public ownership alongside bringing track and train back together, to make sure our railways work properly and in the interest of passengers. And we will tackle longstanding staffing issues by taking a grown-up approach to industrial relations.”

The numbers in full

Tony Blair (2 May 1997 to 27 June 2007) 84.2%


Gordon Brown (27 June 2007 to 11 May 2010) 90.6%

David Cameron (11 May 2010 to 13 July 2016) 90.2%

Theresa May (13 July 2016 to 24 July 2019) 87.3%

Boris Johnson (24 July 2019 to 6 September 2022) 89.5%

Liz Truss (6 September 2022 to 25 October 2022) 88%*

Rishi Sunak (25 October 2022 to 5 July 2024) 85.5%

* statistically insignificant.

Each PM’s PPM is calculated as an average of the four-week rail period score recorded across Great Britain during their entire premiership. Periods with a change of prime minister have been allocated to the PM in office for the longest part of that period. Source: Office of Rail and Road passenger rail performance data.

Keir Starmer accused of fast tracking plan to re-nationalise railways

From The Mail, via MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/keir-starmer-accused-of-fast-tracking-plan-to-re-nationalise-railways/ar-AA1pJQDq?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=00c26718a5dc4026a2891d43b5d898e8&ei=78)

I think this may be the first time I have seen the Daily Mail criticise a government for cutting red tape. Unless I am mistaken, renationalising the railway was a manifesto commitment, so the government is entitled to go ahead at speed if it wishes.

Rail nationalisation takes a step closer under Starmer’s first major public reform in Commons victory

The first major reform to public services by Keir Starmer’s government has passed all stages in the Commons less than two months after voters installed him into Downing Street.

The historic Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill passed its third reading in Commons as the first step in renationalising Britain’s railways.

It came as the shadow Great British Railways was also set up in preparation for running the new publicly owned service.

The Tories have accused Labour of putting ideology before value for money but the speed with which the Bill has been passed through has intentionally been a sign to the left that Starmer’s government has a socialist agenda.

Transport Secretary Louise Haigh said: “Today, I am firing the starting gun on the biggest reforms to our railways in a generation. I am determined to end the chaos, delay and disruption faced by people on train journeys every day.
“Establishing shadow Great British Railways marks a significant step towards delivering a unified railway with passengers at its heart by bringing together track and train, and by progressing the Passenger Railways Services Bill we’re one step closer to public ownership which will help put our railways back on track.

“This Government will direct every penny into creating a stronger, more reliable rail network that works for everyone.

“This is about making the railways work for the people that use them – putting passengers first and driving up performance.”

The Tories had also planned to set up a Great British Rail had they won power again but as a body to work with the private sector.

Shadow transport secretary Helen Whately had accused Labour of putting leftwing dogma before practical solutions.

After the votes she said: “Today in Parliament Labour voted against rail passengers (and rural passengers specifically) and a pay review body to help them resist union pay demands.

“While we’re on the side of passengers and taxpayers they’re stuck under the thumb of their union paymasters.”

She was further angered when transport minister Simon Lightwood announced that the government is exploring the option of a pay review body for public sector rail workers to end the overcomplicated pay review system after a number of strikes on the network.

The Bill cleared the House of Commons on Tuesday and will go to the House of Lords for further examination.

Shadow GBR is now legally active. If anyone wants to catch up on the speeches yesterday, they can be found ...

And it has the majority to do it