Railway Services: South-West

09:30:00

I beg to move, That this House has considered railway services in the South West. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. The south-west is hugely reliant on the mainline railway—it is an economic lifeline. As I am the MP for Newton Abbot, which includes Dawlish, Teignmouth and Kingsteignton—all towns with strong railway heritage—the railway is a fundamental part of my life and community. Devon and Cornwall are notoriously underserved by transport: there is one motorway and just two national roads. The road network in Devon is largely minor roads full of potholes. The mainline railway is the key economic lifeline for the entire region. Getting from Exeter to Paddington in a couple of hours makes a huge difference and enables many people to work part in London and part in Devon—including myself, even before I was an MP. The value of the railway to the economy was demonstrated during the 2014 Dawlish storm incident. From a Transport Committee record, we know that the storms on 4 February and 14 February 2014 caused a 100 metre breach in the sea wall at Dawlish and a 25,000 tonne landslip between Dawlish and Teignmouth, which was exacerbated by a further landslip on 5 March. The incident closed the line for eight weeks. An immediate repair cost of £35 million, including 300 engineers—the much-lauded “orange army”—got the line running again, but the interruption cost the local economy an estimated £1.2 billion. It is estimated that the Plymouth economy alone lost £600,000 each day the line was shut. Since 2014 a lot has changed, but the dependence on the railway has, if anything, increased. Please do not think of tourism as the only industry in Devon: remote working has blossomed, and it is clear from Office of Road and Rail statistics that the overwhelming majority of rail journeys from Exeter and the other main stations are to and from London. Why do we need a debate on the topic? The answer is that this vital railway link is again under threat from a number of different sources. After the 2014 storm, the then Prime Minister promised that money was no object and that the line would be made resilient. A five-phase plan was drawn up and work began. The new sea wall was built, and Dawlish railway station had a rebuilt sea defence as well. The first four phases of that plan have been done and are now in place. One massive benefit was the new bridge at Dawlish, which made both platforms accessible without steps—something that we still need in too many other stations, including Teignmouth.

Many railway stations across the south-west remain inaccessible. Disabled people, unable to get support, have had serious accidents at railway stations in constituencies such as Yeovil. Will my hon. Friend join me in urging the Government to improve the Access for All programme, as well as holding operations such as Great Western Railway to account when proper support is not in place for disabled railway passengers?

My hon. Friend makes a good point. Accessible, step-free stations are vitally important across Devon.

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate. He is right to highlight the contact between the south-west and London in particular. It is disappointing that, even in London, almost two thirds of tube and other stations have no access for disabled people. If the Government are going to make improvements to railway movement for passengers, then accessibility for disabled people—and access to work for them—is key to that moving forward.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. When I met Network Rail in the autumn, it said that the design team for the fifth and final phase of the work would be reassigned if the funding was not forthcoming soon. That would put the project back, and significant extra funds would be required to get it back up to speed. A few months ago, I asked the then Transport Secretary about the funding for the critical final phase of the Dawlish rail resilience programme, which is the largest piece of work. It deals with the landslips that caused the line to be closed long beyond the short time it took to repair the sea wall breach. She looked shocked to learn that the funding was not already there. Although she did not promise the funds, she indicated that the project would be a high priority. The line has been closed on a number of occasions over the past years. The previous large cliff collapse was in the winter of 2000-01, according to the “West of Exeter Route Resilience Study”. I ask the Minister to reassure Network Rail and my constituents that that vital project will not be quietly forgotten, but will be completed to protect the economic wellbeing of the south-west and my constituents’ access to rail services. However, there are other threats too. The Great Western main line not only runs from Paddington to Exeter, Plymouth, Penzance and the far west of Cornwall, but covers Swindon, Bristol, Cheltenham and Gloucester, to name but a few, not forgetting Cardiff, Swansea and south Wales.

I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. He is well aware that the south-west and Wales are connected by the Severn tunnel, which is often closed—it is likely that the closures are in his region. Does he agree that that is impacting economic growth in south Wales, and is all the more reason for Wales to receive the consequentials from HS2 funding to invest in our own railways in Wales, including the Heart of Wales line in my constituency?

I thank my hon. Friend for that valuable point. He is absolutely right that Wales has been seen off, in terms of funding.

I sympathise with hon. Members speaking on behalf of Wales. I represent commuters using Bedwyn station, and I want to point out on behalf of Wiltshire that in 2022 we lost three of our inter-city express trains in order to support the Cardiff to Penzance line. Commuters using Bedwyn no longer have the same off-peak service into London that we had before. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, as the Government look to commission a new fleet of inter-city trains for Great Western, it would be good to see the rightful return of a proper off-peak service that supports commuters in Wiltshire?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: we need more services on all these lines to support our constituents. However, everything I have outlined will be interrupted by the creation of the HS2 link to Old Oak Common. High-speed rail is a welcome improvement to our nation’s infrastructure, but the implementation of that project has been handled poorly in the past. It has ignored the largest benefit—connections within the northern powerhouse—and the focus on delivering faster rail between London and Birmingham has delivered unwanted side effects. The decision to terminate the HS2 services at Old Oak Common, three miles west of Paddington, was quickly overturned by the incoming Government. Their announcement of a resumption of the project to tunnel to Euston is to be welcomed, but the 14-platform station at Old Oak Common—eight platforms on the surface and six for HS2 underground—will impact south-west rail services for another six or seven years as it is constructed.

My constituents in Frome and East Somerset are still shocked to learn about the implications of Old Oak Common. Does my hon. Friend agree that the consultation on that huge change, which will have a major impact on the south-west, was insufficient, and that we still need to have some kind of impact survey or study of the potential impact on tourism and business and the other effects of the works at Old Oak Common?

I agree entirely that the impact of Old Oak Common is immense, and will not be just during the construction phase. The six or seven years of delays and cancellations at weekends and Christmases have been covered in this Chamber before, so I will not repeat the list of weeks and weeks of diversions to Euston and significantly reduced services. I have already started to receive complaints from my constituents about the inability of Euston station to cope with the volume of passengers when the trains cannot complete their journeys to Paddington. But the piece of the plan that adds insult to injury for the millions of passengers from the south-west, is the idea that every Great Western Railway train will stop at Old Oak Common, even after construction is completed. It has been somewhat unclear—some misleading averages have been quoted—but having met with GWR and Network Rail, I understand that stopping at Old Oak Common will add some five to 15 minutes to every single journey. Adding 15 minutes on to the fast train—of around two hours—from Exeter to London is significant, and even more so on the quicker trains from Cheltenham or Bristol. Travel to Birmingham is already available via Bristol. Looking at journey times, it will usually be faster to go to Birmingham via Bristol, unless users are further east than Swindon or Westbury. Stopping at Old Oak Common will bring little or no benefit to the majority of the long-distance rail users of the west, south-west and Wales. Can the Minister confirm that fast trains from the south-west should be able to go through Old Oak Common without stopping?

My hon. Friend is making an excellent case. Penzance, west Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly are all in my constituency, so I know that if there are problems on the link at Dawlish, that can multiply the impact of those disruptions for people in the far west of Cornwall. Does he share my concern that it seems that with this multi-billion pound HS2 project, people in Penzance, in west Cornwall, and no doubt in his constituency as well, will experience all the pain but none of the gain? If it is two hours to Exeter, it is another three hours down to Penzance. It needs to be considered that we want to avoid the unnecessary disruption to people’s lives for the next seven years.

My hon. Friend makes a very good point. It is even harder for those down in Cornwall than it is for those in Devon. Both of these significant impacts are examples of the historic lack of investment in the railways in the south-west. In the south-west, we can often feel like second-class travellers—watching our services get worse so that other services can be made better. Local rail services in Devon are few and far between. Rather than a few minutes between services—as we enjoy here in London—we are lucky if we have one or two trains an hour. Trains are often made up of fewer carriages than planned due to faults or breakdowns. Schoolchildren travelling locally between towns have been unable to get on to services because they are too full, due to their having only half the expected number of carriages. A constituent told me that her young daughter was left in tears, having been denied access to a train with her group, which triggered an anxiety attack. On the London services, mobile phone coverage is barely useable for much of the journey. While for some that may be a blessed relief, it means that wi-fi connections are not reliable—a huge issue in a world where so many people rely on good connections to usefully work on the train. I consider myself fortunate, going to Devon. If I were to continue the journey in Cornwall, the train speed would slow down considerably—as my hon. Friend the Member for St Ives (Andrew George) just mentioned. Journey times could be significantly reduced by even partial electrification, as hybrid trains on the line could speed up faster and climb some of the hills quicker. I am sure my Cornish colleagues could elaborate. I ask the Minister to consider what might be done to show my constituents, and the population of the wider south-west, that they have not been ignored. I am asking for us to receive some benefits from new investment, not just delays to accommodate fast access for others to the midlands and the north. I am specifically asking for more train carriages for more local services; full metro services with no greater than half an hour between scheduled trains; monitoring and accelerating the roll-out of the Access for All programme; reliable wifi across the entire route; electrification to improve journey times to Cornwall; fast trains from Wales to the west to the south-west not stopping at Old Oak Common; and commitment to complete the Dawlish rail resilience programme.

09:45:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) on securing this important debate. We all know the importance of strong and effective railway services in the south-west. I will give a bit of background on my constituency. As I mentioned in my maiden speech in the House—and continue to mention at every opportunity—improving the transport links in my constituency of Tiverton and Minehead is one of my top priorities. We are served by only one major train station: Tiverton Parkway, which sits on the Great Western Railway and CrossCountry lines, as well as the charming and historic West Somerset Railway—a heritage line that runs up through the shoulder of my constituency and along the coast, terminating at Minehead. Those services provide the totality of rail connections in my constituency, but there is still no way to get from Tiverton to Minehead. Minehead desperately needs linking to the main line at Taunton, as I am sure my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) would agree, but there are much wider issues at play for rail travel in Tiverton and Minehead. The latest available data from July to September ’24 lays bare the inadequacy of railway services across the south-west. The punctuality of CrossCountry trains is pitiful—more often tardy than not, just 46.4% of the time did the service run as scheduled. That is shocking, as the figure is over 20 percentage points below the national average for punctuality on the rail network over the same period. Meanwhile, the Great Western Railway service is understood to have operated in accordance with the timetable 60.2% of the time—still over 7 percentage points lower than the national figure. That is better, but hardly an advert for timeliness. Not knowing whether a scheduled service will appear on time is far from the only issue for my constituents. Even when the service is scheduled, and appears to be all-functioning, there is always the risk of cancellation. Both of the major carriers for Tiverton and Minehead had cancellation rates above the national average from July to September ’24, and in both cases, the majority of those trains were cancelled as a result of not Network Rail, but the operator itself. That is not what the people of Tiverton and Minehead expect when they buy their tickets, and they deserve better. As is also the case across the length and breadth of the country, passengers in the south-west are forced to grapple with exorbitant train fares. Even with the Government’s rail fare discounts, which are in place for the next few months, the price of standard regulated tickets in England will go up by 4.6% on 2 March, climbing higher than the retail prices index inflation and hitting passengers hard. The Liberal Democrats have previously called on the Government to do the decent thing and freeze rail fares immediately to help families struggling under the cost of living crisis, instead of hiking ticket prices. We will continue to fight for a fair deal for commuters and families who will be left forking out more and more for the privilege of using Britain’s rail systems. I am not sure how many people in the south-west would call it a “privilege”. Just 1% of my constituents use rail as their means of travelling to work, according to data from the House of Commons Library. That is well below the national average, but not at all surprising, given the sorry picture for rail travellers in my constituency that I have painted. Members might assume that the proportion of my constituents travelling to work by bus would be higher, but I am afraid to report that that percentage sits at just 2%. I am also an avid campaigner for improving the bus routes in Tiverton and Minehead, but we are talking about railways today. The state of railway services in not just Tiverton and Minehead, but the whole south-west, adds strain on the road network, because the lack of transport connectivity and the unreliable, overcrowded and overcharged public transport links leave people with no other choice but to travel by car. The environmental implications of that reality cannot be ignored. Before closing, I must briefly draw attention to the looming Old Oak Common HS2 project and the inevitable disruption to travel that it will cause. Pressing ahead with the project will condemn the south-west to inter-city services that are among the slowest anywhere in the country and greatly reduce the number of direct trains to London. To accommodate the new role of Old Oak Common, trains originating in the south-west will be diverted from the traditional London Paddington route to London Euston, which will add an hour, on average, to train journeys. The current provision of rail services is already well below a level that could be deemed satisfactory, so the new interchange at Old Oak Common comes at great expense to the west country and our friends in south Wales. Immediately freezing fares and introducing discounts for passengers in the south-west seem reasonable and fair first steps towards correcting that glaring disservice to the people of Tiverton and Minehead, and beyond. Beyond the short term, we ought to simplify the fragmented ticketing system to provide passengers with more affordable fares if we are serious about making public transport public. The Government have an opportunity to look seriously at the issues of the south-west and its rail network, and I sincerely hope that they do so. For far too long, transport links have been overlooked and under-resourced. I appreciate that the pressures on the public purse are heavy at the moment, but so are the pressures on ordinary people in Tiverton and Minehead, and across the south-west. I urge the Government to look closely at what they can do to better support the rail, bus and road network so that the people of the south-west do not have to settle for the sort of service that is, far too often, currently on offer.

09:51:00

I thank you for your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan, and I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for securing the debate. The need to improve rail services across the south-west—particularly in Cornwall, which is at the sharp end of our problems—cannot be overstated. Connectivity is the backbone of our economy and our communities, yet our transport infrastructure still lags far behind what is needed to unleash their full potential. This summer, the Mid Cornwall metro will launch in my constituency, offering improved rail links between Newquay and other parts of Cornwall. Although that is a very welcome development that goes some way to undoing the damage inflicted on the line in 1987 by the then Prime Minister, for people outside of Newquay, the Mid Cornwall metro, despite its lofty name, will fall somewhat short of being the transformational project that the duchy needs. That brings me to the wider issue of transport in my constituency. The road between our two major towns, St Austell and Newquay, is winding and unsafe. Given the absence of a direct train linking the towns—despite a track that runs relatively directly from St Austell, through Burngullow and up to St Dennis, falling short of rejoining the main Newquay line at Goss Moor by just a mile or so—large-scale capital investment in a transformative project is desperately needed. We have a stunning stretch of line running from my hometown down into another town served by treacherous roads: Fowey, a town that has long shipped our white gold, china clay, to the world. I urge the Minister to explore the feasibility of such transformative projects in Cornwall—particularly on those magnificent branch lines, which have been ravaged over the years—to provide clarity on our clean transport plans and to make public transport in Cornwall a no-brainer rather than a chore, ensuring that our communities have the infrastructure that they need to thrive. If we are to build more homes, people in Cornwall must see that commensurate services and infrastructure are put in place. In the west, we need a fair deal for the Isles of Scilly—well represented by the hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George)—and we need improved rail links down to our fine harbour in Falmouth, a contender for a floating offshore wind hub. In the east, we also face significant challenges with the Tamar bridge and Torpoint ferry services, which are vital lifelines for local residents. We need a deal that prioritises their needs and alleviates the financial burden on commuters and families. Finally, I stress the need for dramatically improved internet connectivity on trains. In today’s connected world, reliable onboard connectivity is a necessity, not a luxury. Although some rail services in the UK benefit from electrification and high-speed, dependable internet access, such advances are far from universal and passengers across the south-west are too often excluded from them. Equal access to modern amenities such as those is essential to ensuring that rail travel is both productive and comfortable for everyone. It would be a small grace to mitigate some of the chaos caused by the Old Oak Common HS2 project—a supposed England and Wales project, and even an England and Cornwall project, but I will believe it when I see it. As the hon. Member for Newton Abbot pointed out, the south-west, including Cornwall, deserves a transport strategy that addresses our real needs and delivers transformative change. I look forward to hearing how the Minister intends to prioritise our region, close the gap in infrastructure investment, and provide Cornwall and the wider south-west with the tools we need to thrive in the years ahead.

09:55:00

It is pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for opening this debate. I am grateful to be able to speak in this debate to represent my many constituents who rely on these services every day, and as somebody who spends a lot of time—often more than intended—on trains. Unfortunately, my Bristol Central constituents often contact me about their poor experiences with trains in and around Bristol. Complaints over services, particularly between Bristol and London, are frequent, as the journey entails extortionate, prohibitive costs with disappointing services, cancellations and delays featuring all too often. That unreliability is incredibly frustrating for many constituents, but particularly for disabled constituents and those with long-term health conditions, who raise with me that they often go to huge lengths to carefully plan their journeys, only to have them upturned at the last minute. I reinforce the point made by several Members on the importance of disabled accessible train stations. Does the Minister have any updates about progress to make Lawrence Hill station in Bristol, which is just outside my constituency but used by many of constituents, disabled accessible? I know that my predecessor Thangam Debbonaire campaigned on that issue for many years. Accessibility and unreliability issues affect so many of my constituents, who are left unable to make their trips or are forced to choose transport that is more expensive and often much more damaging to the environment, as the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) pointed out. Train journeys produce only around 32% of the emissions of a car journey per person; to avoid unnecessary emissions, we need to make the greenest option the easiest option, and that requires, above all, reliability. I am very pleased to see the railways coming back into public ownership; the Green party has been a long-standing advocate of renationalisation, and I am looking forward to seeing the implementation of that essential transition. On that point, can the Minister give any further indications of when Great Western Railway will come back into public ownership? I understand that the core term expiry date is in June this year, but the full expiry date is not until June 2028, leaving some uncertainty over when exactly the Government will end the contract. I would be grateful if the Minister could give any clarification to constituents. Hopefully the answer is sooner rather than later, but if my constituents are facing a wait of three or more years, will the Minister tell us what steps he plans to take to make the train services in the south-west more reliable and affordable in the meantime? I have also been contacted about the reopening of the Portishead branch line which, though not quite in my constituency, is also used by many of my constituents, so I would be grateful if the Minister could provide an update on that too. I will end my remarks there, but I would be grateful if the Minister could respond to my questions and give some clarity to my constituents on the steps being taken to provide a modern, affordable and reliable rail service.

09:59:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. First, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for his work securing this debate, the Backbench Business Committee for granting it, and hon. Members from across the House for agreeing to speak. As we have heard from everyone here today, it is clear that the railway network in the south-west needs urgent improvement. The failure of successive Conservative Governments has left the network in a terrible state. Ticket prices are too high and services too unreliable. Infrastructure is too old and capacity too meagre. That is true across the country, but nowhere more so than in the south-west. As we have heard from Members from across the House, businesses and individuals are highly reliant on the railways and Labour needs to take urgent action. If the Government are hoping to meet their targets on economic growth and housing, ensuring that that key region has a fully functioning rail system is vital. That requires action. The Government must ensure that the challenges faced by the railways in the south-west are met. We have heard today about a number of the challenges. As my hon. Friends the Members for Newton Abbot and for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) eloquently explained, the rail services of those in the further reaches of our isles are uniquely vulnerable. As we saw when the sea wall fell at Dawlish, this can have catastrophic consequences for those further down the line, cutting them off from the rest of the country. We heard the figures earlier. We cannot afford for that to happen again, so it is vital that the new Government back the fifth stage of the project, to ensure that the line is protected from further disruption. Members today have again raised a number of concerns about the building works at Old Oak Common. As has been said, there will be six years of disruption. As my hon. Friend the Member for St Ives (Andrew George) said, residents and constituents in the south-west will get all the pain but none of the gain. Anyone living west of Swindon and Westbury will simply get no real benefit from these connections. We need to compensate them by doing other things for the rail system and other transport in the south-west. We have had doubts about the current capacity of Euston and the overcrowding there during the building works, and we have the other issue about the trains stopping at Old Oak Common—the five to 15-minute delay. It sounds like a small thing, but it is important when we are talking about a fast train. Previously, the Minister’s colleague said that no decision had been made on whether every train would stop at Old Oak Common. May we have an update on that, please? Although my party and I are highly supportive of the HS2 project, there are understandable concerns. We appreciate that Old Oak Common is a vital part of HS2 and will bring benefits to many. We must also accept, though, that the benefits of Old Oak Common and HS2 will be less keenly felt by those in the south-west. We will keep reiterating that, and we need to do something for them. The constituents of the south-west, including those represented today, must receive reassurances that the Government are listening and they are not being ignored. Their voice must be heard, and I hope that their patience will be rewarded by their finally receiving the oft-promised investment in the region that it so desperately needs and deserves. We heard about some of that today from colleagues, from my party and others. The Access for All programme appeared to die under the Tories. We need access for all, not just in the south-west, of course, but across all regions and particularly in London, as the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) said. The Severn Tunnel closure is causing real problems for transport into the west and into Wales. I asked this question of the Secretary of State last Thursday in Transport questions: will Wales get more investment to compensate for the money going to HS2? HS2 is being treated as an England and Wales project. It is giving no great benefit to Wales. Wales needs some money in the same way as Scotland did, and it needs investment in the Welsh rail system. We need proper services for Wiltshire. We need to address the fact that there are short trains; more train carriages need to be introduced. There are problems with mobile phone access. We hear that time and time again. We have to bring the rail system into the 21st century. The need to electrify sections of the line to speed up the trains is also important, and punctuality is a real issue, not to mention the exorbitant cost of rail travel to the south-west.

My hon. Friend is making some important points. Does he agree that the decision to renationalise South Western Railway a year before the Government have set up GB Rail will inevitably mean that investment in the kind of upgrades he is talking about will stagnate completely?

There is a real issue here, and I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. GB Rail exists as an idea, but we do not yet know what it will do, and we have real problems. The idea that nationalising rail will suddenly solve the problem is too simplistic. We are agnostic about ownership; we need to actually invest in our rail system. On that point, my party has been supportive of open access, which is why we supported the Go-Op co-operative and its ideas to bring rail systems to the south-west. We are worried by what the Secretary of State said in a letter last week—she seems to be going cold on open access—so we would like more clarity on that. We are supportive of the Go-Op co-operative idea, and we want to see such ideas working. In fact, open access is the only bit of the rail system that is working quite well at the moment. Hull Trains, for example, has far better customer satisfaction than any other part of the rail system. The idea that we are now backing out of open access worries us, and Go-Op was a perfect idea to help a particular section of the south-west. I once again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot for securing this debate; we would love some answers from the Minister.

10:06:00

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) on securing this debate, and I thank all the Members who have contributed. We are very familiar with this issue; I have taken part in many such debates myself. Let me respond to a couple of comments. The hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) alerted us to West Somerset Railway, which is an illustration of how, oftentimes, the south-west is seen as a holiday destination rather than somewhere where the railway line is needed as an economic driver. Having been on West Somerset Railway, I am particularly fond of it, but it is not good enough that it is all she has access to, in addition to Tiverton Parkway railway station. The hon. Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law) highlighted the upcoming opening of the Mid Cornwall Metro, which we should acknowledge came from the previous Government’s levelling up funding, and was delivered by Conservative-led Cornwall council. It is a clear illustration of how smaller metros can be delivered, and it would be great to see more of them across the country. My hon. Friend the Member for East Wiltshire (Danny Kruger) raised challenges around Bedwyn station in his constituency, and we have also had contributions from the hon. Members for St Ives (Andrew George), for Yeovil (Adam Dance), for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer) and for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler). It is really good to hear perspectives from across all their constituencies. It is important that I begin by recognising the dedicated workforce we have across the railway industry. Obviously, in the last few months, there has been a huge amount of noise about railways, particularly around increases in salaries and so on. I do not know about other Members, but I have had at least one constituent highlight the fact that, if we are not careful, we could demonise the valuable workers who we need in our train system, so I want to acknowledge on the record the fact that the whole train system is vital to our country. We have to acknowledge that, but we still need to have this debate and represent other voices across our constituencies. We have had three debates on the railways in recent months—or, at least, I have taken part in three debates. This includes my maiden speech, which took place in the passenger railway Bill debate—it would be remiss of me, having spoken to the Minister earlier, not to mention “The Loco-Motion”, which, if hon. Members are interested, I referred to in my maiden speech. In the last two months, we have also had debates on both the railway in Devon and Old Oak Common, so it should be really clear to the Minister and his team that this is something that the south-west is particularly passionate about. I have to admit that I have two hats on—not only am I representing the official Opposition today, but I am a Member from Devon, so I feel a lot of what has been said this morning very deeply. We must also acknowledge the meetings that Ministers have had, and have been very open-handed in. There have been open conversations on this issue, but there is still some way to go, as has been clear today. The hon. Member for Newton Abbot summarised some of those key challenges particularly well in his speech, and he spoke strongly about the funding we need for the fifth phase of Dawlish. Otherwise, it would ultimately be a waste of money; we have done everything that can been achieved without completing that work. Old Oak Common needs no further explanation—it has been covered widely, as has the challenge of wi-fi accessibility, and the wider context of roads and buses in the south-west. Let us not forget, though, that between 2010 and 2024, the Conservatives increased investment by £100 billion, so it is not fair to say that nothing has happened. The railway system is something that we have all been working on over the last few decades. Included in that total was £165 million on the south-west rail resilience programme, which has already been mentioned. It was a bold decision to reallocate HS2 phase 2 funds towards restoring our railways. We would have seen some real benefits from that in the south-west. It has been cancelled because the new Government have said that there is no funding for it. However, I note that they have managed to reinstate phase 2 between Crewe and Manchester, which I assume uses the money that would ultimately have been used for projects such as the TavyRail between Tavistock and Plymouth. I am interested in hearing the Minister comment on that. How can the Government say that the Restoring your Railway was unfunded if they have been able to bring the Crewe to Manchester line back into play? We have also seen the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Act 2024 come through. It has been mentioned this morning, and I will not speak much about it, other than to say that we believe it is an ideological piece of legislation. We were disappointed that the Government rejected our reasoned amendment, which would have ensured that, when terminating existing franchise agreements, the Government would have at least considered operating performance. Instead, we have had inflation-busting pay rises without productivity agreements being secured. Most recently, on 12 December, the latest Office of Rail and Road figures, from July to September, showed that since the increase in those salaries, we have seen decreased performance, decreased punctuality, increased cancellations and decreased public performance measures. I do not want to cast aspersions, but they do seem to be slightly linked. As I draw to a close, I want to lay out some questions for the Minister. Some of them have been touched on before, but it is a perfect opportunity to reiterate them. On 11 November, in the Chamber, I raised the issue of the lack of Sundays in the Great Western Railway contracts, which has a massive impact on rail services across the south-west. It was raised again in the Westminster Hall debate in December, and in November the then Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Sheffield Heeley (Louise Haigh), said that she would return to the House with an update. I would be interested to know if there has been any progress in those negotiations. Is the Minister convinced that the spending decisions for the £30 million Old Oak Common mitigations, which have also been mentioned today, are best for passengers in the south-west? Although many hon. Members have argued today that that £30 million may need to be paid to make Old Oak Common happen, I do not believe that residents across the south-west are necessarily seeing the benefits. Will the Minister commit to ensuring that not all south-west services will have to stop at Old Oak Common? I ask that to reiterate the points that have been made already. Will the Minister also confirm that the HS2 phase 2, Crewe to Manchester route is fully funded? That announcement was made earlier on in this Parliament. Finally, if I may—and if the room will humour me—I have one question that remains unanswered about my constituency. CrossCountry trains do not stop at Ivybridge train station in my constituency, which is fully ready as a park and ride. Currently, only Great Western Railway is committed to doing that, and serves it with 16 trains a day. My constituency has the new and growing town of Sherford, plus the suburbs of Plympton and Plymstock, all of which would benefit from Ivybridge having up to 45 trains stopping a day. Will the Minister commit to looking further into that, and could we work together on pressuring CrossCountry to deliver that for my constituents? I thank everybody who has taken part in this debate today. I do not think that the issue of railways in the south-west is going anywhere fast. [Laughter] That was totally unintended—turns out I am naturally funny after all. Ultimately, I think the Minister will be hearing more from us. I know I speak on behalf of Members from across the south-west when I say that I want to know that the Government are listening. I hope the Government appreciate that we are not going to go away, because the issue is incredibly important to the entire region, which has so much potential for the economy of the United Kingdom.

10:14:00

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair for the very first time, Dr Allin-Khan. I also welcome the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) in her first outing on the Front Bench as the Opposition spokesman. I start by congratulating the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) for securing this debate on railway services in the south-west. I thank all hon. Members for their contributions. On 11 December, I attended a debate on the future of rail services in Devon, and on 17 December, the Minister for the Future of Roads, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood), attended a debate on the impact of Old Oak Common on rail services. The frequency of these debates demonstrates the importance that hon. Members and their constituents place on the rail network, and the crucial role it plays in supporting economic development, housing, employment growth and tourism. This Government recognise that too. That is why we have made fixing Britain’s railway our top transport priority. We need to improve services for passengers and deliver better value for money for the taxpayer. As I said in a previous debate, the south-west has seen a strong recovery in rail passenger numbers since the pandemic. Many services are now very busy indeed, particularly towards the end of the week and at weekends—including Thursdays. [Laughter.] To reduce crowding, funding has been authorised for 12 additional CrossCountry trains. Three are already in service; the rest are due to enter service in May. Local services around Devon are also experiencing some capacity issues, particularly on the Barnstaple line and on school services from Paignton and Exmouth, all of which run into Exeter. Officials and GWR are working on options to increase capacity on some local and regional services, but that will of course be subject to affordability. The Government continue to focus on restoring rail performance. We have been clear that rail services have been failing passengers, and the Rail Minister has now met GWR and CrossCountry, as well as Network Rail, to ensure they are delivering on their plans to address poor performance. A resilient railway is crucial to the economy, not just in the south-west but right across the country. That is why £165 million has been invested to date in the south-west resilience programme at Dawlish, delivering better journey reliability for rail travellers in the south-west and providing greater resilience for the coastal railway during several named storms, alluded to earlier, that have affected the south-west in recent years. We continue to work closely with Network Rail as it develops proposals for the fifth phase of the programme, between Parsons tunnel and Teignmouth. Hon. Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law), have shown strong support for a number of potential rail projects across the region and the country. Ministers have been clear, however, that it will not be possible in the context of the financial situation the Government have inherited to afford to deliver all the proposed projects. The Secretary of State is conducting a thorough review of the previous Government’s plans, to ensure that our transport infrastructure portfolio drives economic growth and delivers value for taxpayers. Many Members have referenced Old Oak Common and the impact it will have on rail services to and from the south-west. The station will enable HS2 services to start operating, by providing a new interchange with the Elizabeth line. Without it, HS2 cannot open. As Members will appreciate, a project of the scale and significance of Old Oak Common cannot be delivered without some disruption to existing services. Our challenge to HS2 Ltd is to keep that disruption to a minimum and to support Network Rail and train operators to keep passengers moving. The most recent phase of the work took place over Christmas, and was delivered successfully. It required a three-day closure of Paddington station, in addition to Christmas day and Boxing day. The rail industry worked hard to prepare for that. Some long-distance Great Western services were diverted into Euston station to maintain a direct link into a London terminus, while others terminated at Ealing Broadway and Reading. We expect that to provide a model for any future closures of the railway into Paddington. As has been said, the next significant block of work had been due to take place in December 2026, but that has now been replanned to a later date by HS2 Ltd. Further details about the timings of future works will be shared as soon as they become available in the spring. The Rail Minister and I have heard from many colleagues about their constituents’ concerns about the future timetable and the potential impact on journey times. That was addressed in detail on 17 December by my hon. Friend the Minister for Future of Roads, and I refer hon. Members to Hansard for more information. As has been noted previously, the future timetable will be under development for many years to come. Officials are working with the industry to assess the options for calling patterns at Old Oak Common. Ministers are committed to ensuring that passenger interests are considered and that disruption is minimised for passengers, both during and after construction. I will close this part of my speech by confirming that the Government will continue to put passengers at the heart of what we do in delivering our railway, which we can be proud of once again in its 200th year. The Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for South West Devon, talked about GWR Sunday services. The Government of course recognise that performance is not where it needs to be. That is due to a range of issues, including infrastructure and fleet reliability, as well as train crew availability, which has resulted in high levels of cancellations on Sundays in recent months. Officials and GWR are actively working to address this issue. A number of Members raised wi-fi connectivity. Free wi-fi is available on GWR services, but it is particularly poor on parts of the network. Ministers have asked officials to explore the feasibility of a range of technology options to improve passenger connectivity on the rail network. The Department is also conducting research to measure the strength of mobile signals along the network, to fully understand where interventions are needed and any potential impacts. Electrification was also mentioned. The most used part of the Great Western network—between London Paddington and Cardiff—has been electrified, and there are currently no plans to electrify further parts of it. A number of Members mentioned accessibility. Following the election, we are carefully considering the best approach to the Access for All programme. Department for Transport Ministers are not yet able to comment on the next steps regarding the project at specific stations, but hon. Members should be assured that we are committed to improving the accessibility of the railway and that we recognise the valuable social and economic benefits that that brings to our communities. The south west rail resilience programme was mentioned, and the Government recognise the importance of the rail route through Dawlish and the south-west region. To date, as I mentioned, £165 million has been invested through the programme to deliver improved resilience across the route. I would also echo again that no decision has been taken on which services will call at Old Oak Common and when; the future timetable is under development, and will be for many years to come. Members raised the issue of rail fares. We are committed to the biggest overhaul of our railways in a generation and to ensuring that people receive better services and have simpler ticketing. Our aim is to keep the price of rail travel at a point that is good for passengers and taxpayers. We are also committed to reviewing the overly complicated fares system. Many Members mentioned general performance. SWR performance on the west of England line has been challenging, and falls way below our expectations for passengers. The mostly single-line section between Salisbury and Exter has suffered multiple failures and has little resilience in the event of disruption. SWR and Network Rail have therefore dedicated a specific working group to looking at minimising the impact of delay and cancellation going forward. As regards CrossCountry, Members will be aware that, as a result of poor performance, it is subject to a remedial agreement that runs until March 2025. The Department will monitor outputs closely to ensure that CrossCountry is making sufficient progress. I welcome the comments by the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer) about the renationalisation of our rail. The Government are committed to ending years of poor service and fragmentation on our railways by creating a unified and simplified system through public ownership and the establishment of Great British Railways. All currently franchised services are expected to be in public ownership within the next three years. With that, I thank Members once again for their contributions.

10:25:00

I thank the Backbench Business Committee for giving me the opportunity to have this debate, and I thank colleagues from across the House for participating. We have heard some fairly clear messages, and I thank the Minister for responding to some of them. There is certainly some hope in some of the responses that have been given. It is clear that the south-west and Wales have been disadvantaged over a long period through lack of investment in the railways. Although large sums have been talked about, they have clearly not been used down in the south-west. I thank the Minister for recognising the importance of the rail network and for the news about increasing some of the capacity on local services, which is most welcome. The Minister said that a resilient railway is crucial, and that is exactly right. Parsons tunnel to Teignmouth— I am afraid it is pronounced “Tinmuth”, and not like Tynemouth, which is somewhere else; it is very confusing because Teignbridge is pronounced “Teenbridge”, so the pronunciation is most unique—is absolutely vital. It was the collapse of that section that closed the railway for eight weeks; it was not the breach of the sea wall that closed it. It had happened 15 years before, and it will happen again; those cliffs are not protected. Without the fifth phase, the resilience work that has been done to date will be wasted. What Network Rail needs is not funding today but the promise of funding in the future, to ensure that the design team is there and ready to go when funding is available. We all understand that we cannot fund everything at once—I do not think that anyone is asking for that—so I understand it when the Minister says he cannot fund everything now. What I want is a promise that this work will be funded in the future, when money is available, so that we can make sure that it is progressed and not forgotten. That is absolutely vital. On HS2 disruption, it was interesting to hear that the purpose of Old Oak Common is to transfer passengers from HS2 to the Elizabeth line. That is a clear focus, and it shows that no real interaction is intended with GWR’s south-west and Wales services. On the idea of stopping trains, again, I do not think we expect a complete timetable at this stage; we would just like the confirmed option that some trains will not stop. That option has been ruled out in some of the conversations I have had, and I like the fact that it is now open. Having that as a commitment, even without the full timetable, will reassure my constituents that fast trains will still be able to go through to London. The £165 million Dawlish investment is also very much welcomed. I refer back to the £1.2 billion cost of the closure. So it is £165 million versus £1.2 billion. To me, it is obvious that that investment needs to be continued. I end by thanking you, Dr Allin-Khan, and congratulating you on chairing your first Westminster Hall debate. I also thank everybody else who was present for the debate, and I look forward to having more conversations with Rail Ministers about the future of railways in the south-west, because we are only just beginning this journey. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered railway services in the South West.

10:29:00