Jerome Mayhew
MP for Broadland and Fakenham · Conservative · United Kingdom
“] I would be grateful if Members listened to the speech being made, rather than making their own from the Government Front Bench. Welfare dependency has to be addressed, yet we are waiting for a report, and then a response from the Government, and then a White Paper sometime next year, apparently.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is an increase of more than a quarter of a trillion pounds in borrowing, with no plan to get it down and no credible plan to reduce welfare spending, which is the next major issue that we have to address.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will go out on a limb and say that this is a terrible Budget. It is not just a “steady as it goes” Budget, because everyone in this Chamber knows that we have got some serious problems that have to be addressed by this country, both politically and economically. This will be known as the “kick it down the road” Budget.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will not. I have only a minute left. We have tax rises being imposed on savers. What a weird argument that is—that increased taxes should be imposed on people who are doing the right thing.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is ridiculous. We have Ministers telling us that we have to stockpile food, but we have capital expenditure that is due to take place after that 1,000-day period. This is back-to-front government, and it is a negligent Treasury that is imposing this on our defence sector.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government spent two and a half years virtue signalling about the North sea. They said there was no future for oil and gas and had a ban on licences, as well as increasing taxation.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
2,562 lines on record for Jerome Mayhew, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. Page 4 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“Is this a deliberate decision by the Minister to reduce the rights of mayors and mayoral combined authorities in relation to consultation? If it is, I would be grateful if he could explain why he has reduced powers, as opposed to increasing them. Amendment 106 would ensure that TfL, rather than GBR, decided whether a GBR decision would significantly affect the Greater London economy or persons living in, working in or visiting Greater London. I am sure the Minister will speak to Government amendments 158 to 160 in a moment, but to anticipate his comments, they provide a duty to consult Transport for London to cover designated railway passenger services that operate to, from or within Greater London. The Opposition have no objection to these clarifying amendments. Finally, I understand that new clause 25, tabled by the hon.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the interest of speed, I will skip straight on to amendment 105, which would ensure that mayoral combined authorities, and not GBR, decided whether a GBR decision would significantly affect the authority’s economy. I am repeating a similar argument, but it is an important one—one of process rather than any political issue. Again, we are talking about a rail body making an assessment of the impact of its activities on an economy that it is not a specialist in. Clause 82 creates a duty to consult Transport for London. Again, we have the same concerns as we had regarding clauses 80 and 81. Under the franchise system, the Mayor of London, and other mayors for that matter, were able to drag in rail operators to question them about their performance and standards; however, that right of consultation seems to have been removed.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 103 would ensure that Scottish Ministers, rather than GBR, decided whether a GBR decision would significantly affect Scotland’s economy or persons living in, working in or visiting Scotland. Surely that is the correct approach. Similarly, amendment 104 would ensure that Welsh Ministers, rather than GBR, took the decision. Effectively, instead of GBR having the responsibility to say, “This affects Scotland and/or Wales, and therefore we should consult,” the amendments would give the power to the Scottish or Welsh Ministers to call in a decision on their assessment of their own economy. Surely that is the better approach. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s rebuttal. Clause 81, which introduces a duty to consult mayoral combined authorities, is pretty similar to clause 80.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Most of the clause is pretty unremarkable, but there is one glaring issue with it: it asserts that GBR will decide for itself when a decision will “significantly affect” the Scottish or Welsh economies. The Minister will recognise that GBR is not an economic forecasting or policymaking body and cannot credibly assess national economic impact internally. The clause therefore makes the duty discretionary and risks major decisions proceeding without any meaningful consultation of either Welsh or Scottish Ministers. How is it sensible for GBR to have the duty to assess whether a proposed action is likely to affect the economies of either Scotland or Wales? That brings me neatly on to amendments 103 and 104.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That will teach me to go away for a day; the Committee finished off half the Bill without me. Anyway, we will go back to the usual slow progress today! Clause 80 is pretty straightforward. Great British Railways will have a duty to consult Scottish Ministers before making decisions that relate to cross-border services designated under clause 25, where—this is the important bit— “the decision will significantly affect…Scotland’s economy or…persons living in, working in or visiting Scotland.” Similarly, the clause requires GBR to consult Welsh Ministers where its decisions relate to services designated by the Secretary of State that are provided in Wales under a similar process.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister asserts that the amendments would make the process inefficient. Will he please explain why giving mayoral combined authorities or the Scottish or Welsh Ministers the power to call in consultation would make the process less efficient?”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 160, in clause 82, page 48, line 30, leave out “which is provided in Greater London”. —(Keir Mather.) See the explanatory statement for amendment 158. Clause 82, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 83 Advice from relevant local government bodies”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister has heard my submissions. In the interest of time, I will not press my amendments to a vote. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 80 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 81 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 82 Duty to consult Transport for London Amendments made : 158, in clause 82, page 48, line 30, after “a” insert “London”. This amendment and amendments 159 and 160 provide for the duty to consult Transport for London to cover designated railway passenger services that operate to, from or within Greater London. Amendment 159, in clause 82, page 48, line 30, after “service” insert— “(within the meaning of section 175 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999)”. See the explanatory statement for amendment 158.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“These are two unremarkable clauses. We have no objections to either of them. As for the Government amendments, they are technical in nature and we also support them.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 107, in clause 85, page 50, leave out line 3. This amendment would prevent the Secretary of State from changing the body that gives licences certificates so that it remains the ORR.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 108 is not part of this group but would affect the clause, and would require the Secretary of State to consult passenger and freight service operators, groups representing passengers and railway rail safety organisations before making regulations about the licensing or certification of train drivers. That would mean that not just Labour’s union colleagues would be consulted. I mention the amendment in passing because it is relevant to the discussion of this clause, and I see the Minister nodding sagely. I intend to seek a Division on amendment 107 if the Government are not minded to accept it.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 107 would prevent the Secretary of State from changing the body that gives licences and certificates, so that it remains the Office of Rail and Road, once again restoring power to the independent regulator with experience and expertise in this space. That is a small but important point. It may have been an oversight on the part of the drafters that the ORR is not mentioned. If the intention is to remove that responsibility from the ORR, and that is the Government’s ambition as a result of the clause, perhaps the Minister could make that clear? If not, amendment 107 makes it clear that the ORR is the anticipated body.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Through its omission, it opens the door to the removal of the ORR’s role on this important issue. Unions would clearly fall under the definition in subsection (6)(a), but the drafting effectively ringfences them as the primary consultees while shutting out operators, GBR, passenger groups and safety bodies from the mandatory list. There is a non-mandatory ability to consult, but it seems very odd to identify unions but not any of these other very important organisations as part of a mandatory consultation list. That creates an odd imbalance for regulations that directly affect service delivery and safety, giving one group a guaranteed seat at the table while everyone else is included only at the Secretary of State’s discretion.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The power to amend that legislation is required to ensure that the train driver licensing regime can be updated to reflect technological, clinical and medical advancements. The ability to update the legislation on an enduring basis will help to modernise the framework and support health and safety outcomes for train drivers, as well as avoiding operational impacts such as train drivers being unable to be deployed on account of not passing outdated medical tests. The ability to designate a person or body, for example the Office of Rail and Road or GBR, to publish and maintain technical standards will allow the train driving regime to remain adaptable and effective. We are therefore support that. Subsection (2)(b) does not confirm the ongoing role of the ORR to issue licences or certificates. That is much bigger.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 85 relates to the licensing of train drivers, and other matters relating to them. It gives the Secretary of State the power to amend the Train Driving Licences and Certificates Regulations 2010 and related assimilated law through regulations. The Secretary of State, by interest, has also been empowered to appoint a person or a body to publish and maintain technical standards in a document separate from the regulations. The regulations set out the requirements that ensure train drivers are competent, medically and psychologically fit, trained on the infrastructure, rolling stock and routes that they are to be deployed on, and generally able to drive trains safely.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As I mentioned, we support the intention behind these clauses, but I stand firm in defending the need for the ORR to be the issuing body, so I will press my amendment to a Division. Question put, That the amendment be made.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As for Government amendments 201 and 202, which deal with the Isle of Man, I was slightly surprised by them. I am sorry to say that I have never visited the Isle of Man, so I had to do some research on its rail infrastructure, and it turns out that it is entirely heritage in nature, with Victorian rolling stock including a horse-drawn tramway. I would therefore be grateful if the Minister could explain why Victorian rolling stock and horse-drawn tramways need the benefit of the Cape Town convention and the Luxembourg protocol. I am sure that he has that at his fingertips.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As we have just heard, the Luxembourg protocol is designed to provide access to cheaper rolling stock in the UK and overseas, as finance can be secured and/or rolling stock leased from non-UK sources, and UK rolling stock companies can lease abroad at lower risk. I learned an interesting fact over the weekend. I thought that this proposal would affect only ROSCOs operating in this country, but it actually affects the Government too. I learned that the Government own the freehold of one train in the UK, which is on the Canvey Island miniature railway in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Rebecca Harris), who was very keen to point out to me that the Government have skin in the game on this clause. I have read that into the record, so I hope she is pleased with that. We have no objections to the clause.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have no objection in principle to the new clause, but, as we have learned to our cost as consumers in the similar approach taken to car parking charges and the removal of vehicles badly parked elsewhere, this will all come down to the operators contracted by GBR to undertake that function. It is merely asserted that the costs are related to those incurred in the removal, but we all know that such costs can be inflated by unscrupulous operators. Although we do not object to the new clause in principle, I would be grateful for the Minister’s assurance that reputable companies will be used and that this measure will not be used as a secondary source of income for GBR or its contractors.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(2) The Secretary of State and Great British Railways must have regard to the purpose set out in subsection (1) in exercising their functions under this Act.”— (Jerome Mayhew.) This new clause defines Great British Railways’ purpose. Brought up, and read the First time. Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“New Clause 1 Purpose of Great British Railways “(1) The purpose of Great British Railways is defined by the following objectives— (a) prioritising the needs of Great British Railways passengers in decision-making, (b) delivering reliable, safe and accessible railway passenger services, (c) providing value for money for passengers and taxpayers, including consideration of the affordability of fare prices, (d) increasing passenger numbers and growing usage of the network year-on-year, (e) expanding and improving the network, including services, connectivity, and restoring or adding routes, (f) modernising working practices and innovating to improve productivity, efficiency, and passenger experience, (g) supporting economic growth, national productivity and improving connections between towns, cities and employment centres, (h) improving the experience of disabled and vulnerable passengers and ensuring consistent access to assistance, (i) ensuring fair and transparent treatment of open access, freight and devolved operators when allocating access and charges, (j) growing rail freight, including supporting delivery of the national freight growth target, (k) strengthening the financial sustainability of the railways, reducing reliance on operating subsidy over time, (l) integrating track and train, simplifying structures, and avoiding duplication, and (m) supporting multimodal integration with buses, trams and local transport networks.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“2006/246).”— (Keir Mather.) This new clause makes provision about transfers of staff from the civil service to the Passengers’ Council. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“New Clause 65 Transfer of staff to the Passengers’ Council “(1) The Secretary of State may make one or more schemes under which persons who hold employment in the civil service of the State become employees of the Passengers’ Council (but this is subject to any provision contained in the scheme that allows a person to object to becoming an employee of the Council). (2) A scheme made under this section— (a) may make provision for giving full effect to a person’s transfer into the employment of the Passengers’ Council as a result of the scheme, and (b) may (in particular) include provision that is the same as, or similar to, the provision made by the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (S.I.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(2) In sections ( Transfer schemes made by Secretary of State ), ( Transfer schemes made by Scottish Ministers) and (Transfer schemes made by Welsh Ministers ) and Schedule ( Transfer schemes )— (a) ‘a former GBR’ means a body corporate formerly designated as Great British Railways under section 1; (b) ‘a proposed GBR’ means a body corporate that the Secretary of State proposes to designate as Great British Railways under that section.”— (Keir Mather.) This new clause makes supplementary provision about transfer schemes under new clauses NC61, NC62 and NC63. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(2) The Welsh Ministers must obtain the Secretary of State’s consent before making a scheme under subsection (1)(a), (b) or (c).”— (Keir Mather.) This new clause allows the Welsh Ministers to make schemes transferring property, rights and liabilities in connection with the designation of a body corporate as Great British Railways. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill. New Clause 64 Further provision about transfer schemes “(1) Schedule ( Transfer schemes ) contains further provision about transfer schemes under sections ( Transfer schemes made by Secretary of State ), ( Transfer schemes made by Scottish Ministers ) and ( Transfer schemes made by Welsh Ministers ).”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“New Clause 63 Transfer schemes made by Welsh Ministers “(1) The Welsh Ministers may, for any purpose connected with railways or the provision of railway services, make one or more schemes for the transfer of property, rights and liabilities— (a) from the Welsh Ministers, or a company wholly owned by the Welsh Ministers, to— (i) Great British Railways, (ii) a company wholly owned by Great British Railways, (iii) a proposed GBR, (iv) a company wholly owned by a proposed GBR, or (v) a company jointly owned by two or more of the Welsh Ministers, the Secretary of State, Great British Railways and a proposed GBR; (b) from Great British Railways, a company wholly owned by Great British Railways or a company jointly owned by the Welsh Ministers and Great British Railways to— (i) the Welsh Ministers, (ii) a company wholly owned by the Welsh Ministers, (iii) a proposed GBR, (iv) a company wholly owned by a proposed GBR, or (v) a company jointly owned by the Welsh Ministers and a proposed GBR; (c) from a former GBR, or a company wholly owned by a former GBR, to— (i) the Welsh Ministers, (ii) a company wholly owned by the Welsh Ministers, (iii) Great British Railways, (iv) a company wholly owned by Great British Railways, or (v) a company jointly owned by the Welsh Ministers and Great British Railways; (d) from a company wholly owned by the Welsh Ministers to another company wholly owned by them; (e) from the Welsh Ministers to a company wholly owned by the Welsh Ministers, or vice versa.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(2) The Scottish Ministers must obtain the Secretary of State’s consent before making a scheme under subsection (1)(a), (b) or (c).”— (Keir Mather.) This new clause allows the Scottish Ministers to make schemes transferring property, rights and liabilities in connection with the designation of a body corporate as Great British Railways. Brought up, read the First and Second time, and added to the Bill.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have nothing to add. Question put and agreed to. New clause 61 accordingly read a Second time, and added to the Bill. New Clause 62 Transfer schemes made by Scottish Ministers “(1) The Scottish Ministers may, for any purpose connected with railways or the provision of railway services, make one or more schemes for the transfer of property, rights and liabilities— (a) from the Scottish Ministers, or a company wholly owned by the Scottish Ministers, to— (i) Great British Railways, (ii) a company wholly owned by Great British Railways, (iii) a proposed GBR, (iv) a company wholly owned by a proposed GBR, or (v) a company jointly owned by two or more of the Scottish Ministers, the Secretary of State, Great British Railways and a proposed GBR; (b) from Great British Railways, a company wholly owned by Great British Railways or a company jointly owned by the Scottish Ministers and Great British Railways to— (i) the Scottish Ministers, (ii) a company wholly owned by the Scottish Ministers, (iii) a proposed GBR, (iv) a company wholly owned by a proposed GBR, or (v) a company jointly owned by the Scottish Ministers and a proposed GBR; (c) from a former GBR, a company wholly owned by a former GBR or a company jointly owned by the Scottish Ministers and a former GBR, to— (i) the Scottish Ministers, (ii) a company wholly owned by the Scottish Ministers, (iii) Great British Railways, (iv) a company wholly owned by Great British Railways, or (v) a company jointly owned by the Scottish Ministers and Great British Railways; (d) from a company wholly owned by the Scottish Ministers to another company wholly owned by them; (e) from the Scottish Ministers to a company wholly owned by them, or vice versa.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Sir Alec. On new clause 11, I hear what the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage says about fiscal responsibility, but it seems a bit strange to set up a fund with no funds in it. Although, as Committee members have seen in the new clauses I have tabled, I support the principle of having a long-term approach to infrastructure development and investment in rolling stock and skills in this country, I cannot support the creation of a new fund without fully understanding where that money would come from.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the recent past, this country has not had a very good reputation for delivering large infrastructure works, and having the ability to carry them out quickly and cheaply. The new clause would help, meaning that when we say we will do something, we have a better chance of it actually happening.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That would prevent the loss of specialist skills during funding gaps, which we heard much about in the oral evidence session. Not only that, but I have been lucky enough to be in my role for considerably over a year now, during which I have met many organisations related to the railway supply chain. One overwhelming piece of feedback I get is on the feast and famine we have with the relatively short control periods, and the lack of visibility on what the next control period will have. The new clause seeks to address one of our structural problems, supporting stable employment, rather than cyclical redundancies, and encourages suppliers to invest in new technologies and productivity improvements.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The answer is no, because money was involved. A shining example of the restoring your railways project is the Northumberland line, which was created under and funded by the restoring your railways project, and which is now open and a great success. New clause 35, which is in my name, is relatively long, and would require Great British Railways to create a long-term pipeline of infrastructure works. If our “Certainty of Funding” new clause is added to the Bill, new clause 35 would fit nicely with it. The new clause would provide more certainty to the supply chain, and would make provision for a visible pipeline of works, allowing for long-term investment in UK manufacturing, specialist engineering skills, apprenticeships and workforce development.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think that is sensible, given that the requirement for an annual review may well be too onerous, but we look to the Minister to acknowledge the problems faced by those communities that are cut in half by very impactful level crossings, and to provide assurances that the Government will address this significant concern.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Conservatives are very supportive of the intention behind the new clause. The replacement for Network Rail within GBR cannot bring the same, frankly uninterested, culture to these assessments that Network Rail is notorious for. I salute the tireless campaigning of my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge, who has tabled a number of new clauses on this issue to highlight the problems that his constituents and, as we have just heard, many others have faced. The hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage says that he will not press the new clause to a Division.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is an interesting point. If the productivity of a private business falls, it becomes less profitable and cannot afford pay rises. Should the same attitude not be directed to public sector bodies? Where productivity falls, the people who suffer are the taxpayers. As the Secretary of State and GBR stand in the shoes of the taxpayer, should they not apply the same approach that the private sector has to live with?”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister raises interesting arguments, but I wish new clauses 31 and 32 to be put to a vote. Question put , That the clause be read a Second time.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“(A4) The power under subsection (A3), so far as relating to regulations, includes power to provide for the regulations as amended from time to time to extend as mentioned in that subsection.” This amendment allows clause 86 and regulations under it to be extended to the Isle of Man by Order in Council. Amendment 202, in clause 91, page 53, line 35, leave out subsection (2).— (Keir Mather.) This amendment is consequential on amendment 201. Clause 91, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 92 and 93 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Question proposed, That the Chair do report the Bill, as amended, to the House.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“— (Keir Mather.) This amendment provides for the meaning in the Bill of “wholly owned by the Crown” to be that given by section 151(2) of the Railways Act 1993. Clause 90, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 91 Extent Amendments made: 201, in clause 91, page 53, line 32, at end insert— “(A1) This Act extends to England and Wales and Scotland only, subject to subsections (A2) to (1). (A2) Section 86 and this Part extend also to Northern Ireland. (A3) His Majesty may by Order in Council provide for any of the provisions of section 86 and this Part, or any regulations under that section (whether made before or after the making of the Order in Council), to extend with or without modifications to the Isle of Man.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In that case, these are all straightforward ancillary parts to the Bill, and I have no comments to make. Question put and agreed to. Clause 89 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 90 General interpretation Amendments made: 200, in clause 90, page 53, line 12, at end insert— “‘Passenger Transport Executive for an integrated transport area’ means a body which is the Passenger Transport Executive for an integrated transport area for the purposes of Part 2 of the Transport Act 1968;” This amendment defines Passenger transport executive for an integrated transport area for the purposes of the Bill. Amendment 263, in clause 90, page 53, line 31, at end insert “, except in relation to the expression ‘wholly owned by the Crown’ (as to which see section 151(2) of the Railways Act 1993)”.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That must make me a very slow learner. Finally, I am grateful to all the Committee members, particularly those on the Government Benches. Having sat there myself for what felt like years, I know that it is deeply frustrating to be told by the Whips not even to intervene, let alone make a speech, while the shadow Minister expands at length. There are reasons why we do it, and I hope that those Government Members who have been on this side of Committees will remember them, but I am very grateful for the patience that they have shown me and for the work that they have done with the Committee as a whole. With that, I am happy for the Bill to progress to the next stage.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not going to suggest that we do not progress the Bill to its next stage, because I am not sure I would win that vote, but I want to take this opportunity to thank the Minister for the constructive approach that he has taken to addressing the various amendments and new clauses that the Opposition and the Liberal Democrats—I hope I can speak for them, too—have tabled. I am surprised that he did not adopt a single one of them, but he dealt with them in an unfailingly courteous and thoughtful manner, and I am very grateful to him. I am also grateful to the Chairs—including you, Mr Western—for agreeing to hold the ring, and to the Clerks, who have done an excellent job helping us to navigate a process that, for me, anyway, is just as complex and confusing at the end of the Committee’s proceedings as it was at the beginning.”
House of Commons10 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to the hon. Lady for giving way. This is an important debate. If she has been following the proceedings of the Public Bill Committee for the Railways Bill, she will have heard that at the current rate it will take more than 100 years to get step-free access across the full estate. Does she agree with the Opposition in this instance that that is too long?”
House of Commons9 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Prime Minister made a huge deal about the process that had been gone through when he answered questions from the Leader of the Opposition earlier today. If I understand it correctly, the process was that the Prime Minister wanted Peter Mandelson.”
House of Commons4 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I was just thinking about the response that my right hon. Friend got from the permanent under- secretary. Does he think that was a permanent under-secretary trying to be helpful to the Committee, or was it him obfuscating and telling elected Members of Parliament to get their noses out of his business?”
House of Commons4 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If he does not, he should stick with the current wording; if he does, he should think again.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Every now and again, it should know what its own business is up to.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Question put, That the amendment be made.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 226, in clause 25, page 14, line 9, at end insert— “(1A) When designating railway passenger services, the Secretary of State must— (a) take account of— (i) the Rail Freight Target under section 17, and (ii) the Infrastructure Capacity Plan under section 60; and (b) demonstrate that designations under this section cause no unreasonable detriment to rail freight capacity or growth.” This amendment requires that passenger service decisions are made in the context of network capacity and freight increase priorities.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will have a significant impact on revenue sharing, where 97% of all routes for the Welsh Government contain an English element. I would be grateful if the Minister could consider that.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Those services are the Core Valley lines, the dedicated Swansea to Cardiff route and the Blaenau to Llandudno route—only three. All other services that start in Wales will generally run into England, which poses a significant challenge for the allocation of moneys from ticket sales. The Minister may find it useful to outline the practical management of cross-border rail services, and how the Welsh Government’s operator can operate with a degree of confidence when it must report to both Governments, but exists under only one. That is a genuine tension, which I would be grateful if the Minister could explain the Government’s thoughts on. Amendment 228 is similar to amendments 226 and 227. I will not repeat my arguments, but there is a qualitative difference between the situation in Scotland and that in Wales.”
House of Commons3 February 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗