I thank the noble Lord, Lord Moylan, for the remarks that he has just made. He talks of delay and nothing happening. One of the reasons why I personally am here is that I have been waiting six years for rail reform and, in the end, when I was asked, I volunteered to see whether I could move it forward, because it has taken a very long time. Not much has happened since the timetable crisis of 2018 and the report that Keith Williams wrote.
I thank the noble Baronesses, Lady Brinton, Lady Grey-Thompson and Lady Randerson, for Amendment 17, which is supported also by the noble Lord, Lord Moylan. I absolutely recognise the need to address the passenger experience, and I know that my noble friend Lady Blake, who took the Second Reading, recognises it too. Improving accessibility on the railways is a key priority for the Government and something that the Secretary of State and I are personally committed to. We know that the assistance that passengers receive too often falls short of what they deserve and what they have every right to expect.
I was going to list a range of areas where things need to change, but I am embarrassed to do so because so many speakers in this debate have listed them themselves. All I can do is acknowledge that I have heard the list quite clearly. We know that we need to do better, and it hurts me that the public service that I care about fails so regularly to look after people in the way that it ought to. I personally—and the Secretary of State is in the same position—will do my best to do differently in future.
Many of these issues are, frankly, best solved under public ownership, as the problems that have arisen are a direct result of the current fragmented system. For example, on the specification of new trains, which the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, and others referred to, a guiding mind will take an approach to a greater consistency of design and improve the outcomes for disabled passengers.
In addition, it has been explained, more eloquently than I can do, how many apps there are, how weak they are and how they fail to work. The noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson, took me through, and showed me a huge litany of things that are wrong with, a variety of apps, all of which she needs to make quite simple journeys. I am terribly embarrassed by that. Why should we need so many different electronic devices to deliver such a relatively poor service and outcome in such circumstances? That is an obvious case where consistency is desirable. I referred earlier today to not having a proliferation of train operators,
and this is one of the reasons not to do so. We do not want everyone inventing their own process; we want one consistent process, designed with the people who use it, not done for them and not delivered to them after it is done. I have heard the experiences of the noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson, and others of getting something that they wanted but then discovering it did not do what they wanted.
I contend that one of the clearest reasons for the Bill, which seeks to take train operations back into public ownership progressively, is to make those sorts of improvements a great deal easier to deliver in future. Public ownership and control give us the best platform possible to do that. I appreciate the engagement that I have had to date, especially with the noble Baronesses, Lady Brinton and Lady Grey-Thompson. I believe I have offered a meeting to both of them— I hope I have, but that is done for me—and we will have that before Report. That is not an explanation; it is more of an apology, but I hope that for now it will allow them to withdraw their amendment.
7.30 pm
I turn now to Amendment 38 from the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, and the noble Baroness, Lady Randerson, and Amendment 27A from the noble Lord, Lord Moylan, which require the Secretary of State to lay reports before Parliament. The first requires a report on progress on fares, ticketing and retail reform and the second requires a report on the impact of public ownership on discounted fares. I can confirm in relation to the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Moylan, that there are no plans to remove any of the railcard discount schemes that he and others enjoy which are provided for by Section 28 of the Railways Act 1993, nor any of the other railcard discount schemes that passengers enjoy today. Public ownership of four train operators has not given rise to any erosion of the benefits offered to passengers by those schemes, and future transfer of services to public ownership will be no different in that regard.
More broadly in response to Amendment 38, the Government and I feel very strongly that we must see progress in reforming fares and ticketing. This Bill is essential to making real progress in this area. We are committed to reviewing and simplifying overcomplicated fares and introducing digital innovations. Change is being delivered, but we are looking to expand it further and more quickly in light of the, I hope, success of this Bill. This will avoid the challenges of the current fragmented franchising system where individual operators have worked for their own interests, rather than those of the whole system. For example, delivering improvements for passengers such as simpler fares or smart ticketing means negotiating with the franchisees to agree additional subsidy payments for every change. Public ownership puts an end to this cottage industry of negotiators, advisers and lawyers on commercial terms and will progressively enable us to put the focus where it belongs —on the needs of passengers.
Public ownership also removes the barriers to co-operation by putting paid to the arguments deployed by private sector operators that vital data on demand and revenue cannot be shared because it is commercially confidential, even while the revenue accrues to the
Government rather than to the operators. It will take time, but I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Randerson, that we should make progress now, and we can do that progressively as the train operators come into public ownership. We will set out more details in the forthcoming railways Bill but, given that we support the intention to drive forward progress on these reforms and that we are working on proposals in this area, I urge the noble Baroness not to press this amendment.
Last, but never least, I turn to Amendment 39 from the noble Baronesses, Lady Randerson and Lady Scott, which requires the Government to set up the passenger standards authority within three months of this Bill achieving Royal Assent. The Government are absolutely committed to setting up this authority as we set out in the manifesto and in Getting Britain Moving and have repeated in your Lordships’ House and in the other place. We will put passengers back at the heart of the railway, and that includes creating a watchdog that is robust enough to properly support their interests. The Secretary of State and I share the enthusiasm of the noble Baroness, Lady Scott. That is why we are bringing forward a wider railways Bill which will set up the authority.
While I share the desire for the authority to be set up as soon as possible, it is imperative that we get the detail right and have the opportunity to hear, especially from passengers, what the body should do. That is why I will defend the Government’s intention to use the time they have over the coming months to develop and consult on the PSA so that it can be a body that we can all be proud of. Rushing to set it up and not being properly prepared will not serve passengers in the way that we intend. Like the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, we want a body that covers the whole of the passenger experience now. We need a bit of time to create it, and we need it to champion the long list of passenger experience standards from the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, that it is impossible to disagree with. I would expect the PSA, alongside GBR, to champion the whole range of improvements in standards that he listed. I reassure noble Lords that we are not simply waiting; we have a list of innovations that we are delivering now. I will not make the House suffer by reading out a list, but I would say that we know that we should do more and I think this Bill will enable us to do it. I urge the noble Baroness to withdraw her amendment.