Cost of Rail Services

It is our ambition through public ownership to deliver a more affordable railway. This year’s fare increase of 4.6% is the lowest absolute increase in three years. We are committed to reforming the overcomplicated fares system and expanding ticketing innovations like pay-as-you-go in urban areas across the country.

When the Secretary of State finally steps in and knocks heads together and we get our Azuma train to Grimsby via Market Rasen, will she instruct the railway company to name the locomotive Margaret Thatcher to remind us all that the best way to reduce the cost of rail services is to end restrictive trade union practices?

I hate to disappoint the Father of the House, but I am afraid that I will not be making such a commitment today.

The British people pay some of the highest rail fares in Europe. However, the Government seem to prioritise the size of the socialist state, by kowtowing to trade unions with radical public pay rises and nationalisation plans. Will the Secretary of State instead please focus on improving the lot of commuters—particularly Romford’s hard-working commuters—and take real steps to reduce rail fares and improve railway services?

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman has the gall to raise this issue when, under his party’s Government, fares rose at around twice the speed of wages. I also point out that since 2020, train operating companies have paid out nearly £1 billion to their parent companies, signed off by Conservative Ministers in the previous Government. If the hon. Gentleman wants to talk about costs and value for money on the railway, I suggest he start by looking in the mirror.

It was, in fact, a Conservative Secretary of State who forced fare rises on Transport for London in exchange for covid emergency funding. What steps will my right hon. Friend take to put TfL on a better footing in the future, including backing great projects such as the one in my constituency to upgrade and provide step-free access at one of the busiest stations in the country at South Kensington?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: in the middle of a global pandemic, the Conservatives were still obsessed with settling old political scores over fares in London, rather than doing right by the capital. I vividly remember a meeting with the then Secretary of State to discuss how we could keep services safely running, which ended with him telling me, “This would have been so much easier if you hadn’t frozen fares.” Unlike the Conservatives, this Government will always do right by the capital, as well as the rest of the country.

Can I ask that this UK Government do not follow the approach taken by the Scottish Government on public ownership? ScotRail fares are set for another inflation-busting increase in April, following an 8.7% hike last year and the reintroduction of peak fares in September. Does the Secretary of State agree that the SNP should be making rail more affordable, instead of hitting passengers with painful fare hikes time and again? The increases are bad for Scotland’s rail passengers, bad for our economy and bad for the environment.

I assure my hon. Friend that we will bring the train operating companies into public ownership properly, and that we will not repeat the mistakes we have seen in Scotland.

I call the shadow Minister.

I am very interested by that last answer, because the Government do think that nationalisation will reduce the cost of rail travel. What lessons has the Secretary of State learned from the SNP’s nationalisation of ScotRail?

We will be increasing value for money in the way we operate our railways. To start off with, we will be getting rid of up to £100 million a year in management fees that we are currently paying out of the public purse to the train operating companies. We are determined to drive up performance on our railways and give better value for money to the taxpayer.

The latest experiment in nationalisation has shown in just two years that state inefficiency has pushed up costs—not reduced them—by £600 million, forcing fares to rise, alongside an increase in delays, a slump in customer satisfaction, and cuts, instead of improvements, to services. The data shows that in England, Greater Anglia has been the best performing operator, saving money for taxpayers while serving passengers with modern, punctual trains. The Secretary of State is about to launch a public consultation on nationalisation—one that has been as delayed as ScotRail trains. I am told that even the plan to publish it today has been further delayed, with the excuse of No. 10 on the line. If the Secretary of State consults, she has to be prepared to listen. Will she now listen to the deep concerns of the rail industry, and not just the ever-generous unions, and avoid another disastrous nationalisation?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that the consultation on establishing Great British Railways is coming soon, and I look forward to discussing it further with him. I am confident that by bringing together the management of track and train, we can strip out duplication in our railways, provide better value for the taxpayer and ensure that trains are turning up on time, with reliable and punctual services. That is what we will deliver.