My Lords, I find myself in a somewhat embarrassing position, so far as this amendment is concerned, in that I agree with a lot of what the noble Lord opposite has said. In fact, had he put his name to Amendment 43—which I will speak to—my embarrassment would have been doubled, because he raises a very relevant point, as far as devolution is concerned, about railway services.
I anticipate—my noble friend will tell me if I am wrong —that Great British Railways will assume responsibility for most of the railway stations in England and Wales in future. Actually, I suspect it is only in England because of devolution in Wales. However, when we look at the present situation, most of them—as I have indicated—are owned by Network Rail, but many are run and owned by train operating companies.
Avanti has come under some criticism in your Lordships’ House over the years, not least from me. Avanti runs and is responsible for stations—not small country stations, but fairly large ones such as Birmingham International, a station that I have used frequently over the years. It is a major station with about a dozen different destinations, as far as trains through that station are concerned, yet it is virtually unstaffed after 10 pm. There is a train dispatcher on the platform, as I understand it, but there are no staff at all either in the booking office or on the concourse. I put it to my noble friend: if the major legislation he refers to goes through next year, what will be the position for stations such as Birmingham International? Will Great British Railways assume responsibility for staffing? If so, we can only hope for an improvement in railway staffing.
5 pm
The noble Lord who speaks for the Opposition rightly pointed out that devolution has made a difference for railway lines on Merseyside and here in London. My noble friend indicated during the debate on previous amendments that although those arrangements will not be altered, those powers and privileges will not be granted to the mayors of other conurbations in the United Kingdom. Again, I can express only disappointment if that is the case, because when one compares the lack of staff on many stations owned and maintained by Network Rail with the situation in London or on Merseyside, the passenger does not fare particularly well outside those two cities.
It is many years since one-person operation of trains was introduced. The combination in the early 1980s, following the electrification of the line from St Pancras to Bedford, indicated that all was not well with this habit of destaffing stations and having only a driver locked in a cab on the train. Groups of young men went through the train, robbing passengers with impunity because there were no other members of staff around. The situation had to be changed because of that.
As I have indicated, that was 40 years ago, but in some cases we are no better off in various parts of the country. I mentioned Birmingham International, but noble Lords on both sides will be aware that travelling by train, particularly late at night, is often a pretty solitary experience. I am a proud father of two daughters and two stepdaughters. All four of them have said to me that travelling after, say, 8 pm or 9 pm from local stations in and around, in the case of two of them, the Birmingham area and, in the case of the other two, the London area is not a particularly pleasant experience, but at least in London there are members of staff around to ensure people feel safer. Outside London, of course, there is no such provision, and over the years staff have been withdrawn from various stations throughout the United Kingdom, in my view to the detriment of the travelling public.
To come back to the two regions I just mentioned, London and Merseyside, there are many benefits of devolution, not least democracy, as far as the railway industry is concerned, but there are also many benefits for the passenger. On Merseyrail, for example, every train has a train manager and all but five stations are fully staffed. The noble Lord opposite mentioned the London Overground, where every station is staffed from 15 minutes before the first train to 15 minutes after the departure of the last one. Why can those privileges not be extended to the rest of us? I am not one who tries to foment discontent between those of us who live in, work in or previously represented areas in the provinces, and those in London, but areas outside those two major conurbations come off rather badly when it comes to expenditure, investment and the quality of the rail service.
I put it to my noble friend that the purpose of Great British Railways should surely be to raise standards rather than lower them. The rest of the country deserves the same excellent service provided by mayors Khan and Steve Rotheram in London and Merseyside respectively. I hope my noble friend will refer to the Labour manifesto. With some surprise, I heard the main Opposition spokesperson refer to it in the context of democracy. True democracy will surely mean that a proper standard of service is provided outside London and Merseyside, of the same quality and to the same extent.
I am grateful that the noble Lord opposite did not put his name to my amendment, but I confess that it is not dissimilar to the one to which he spoke. I hope my noble friends who added their name to it will contribute along similar lines.