With just one day to go until the Commons debate and Third Reading, we have today sent our final briefing of legal evidence to Ministers.
It follows a meeting at the Department for Transport (DfT) last week between our co-founder Emily Sullivan, Chris Hinchliff MP and the Rail Minister, Lord Peter Hendy, in which we discussed:
Passenger Rights: We urge Ministers to ensure that passenger and disability rights are strongly established across the Bill, and that rights enforcement is given greater weight than duties for cost-cutting and competition. This means legal rights such as the Equality Act 2010, Consumer Rights Act 2015 and data protection legislation, which should be the basis for all other standards, such as Passenger Charters and License conditions.
Public Interest Duties: We call for strong public interest duties in Clause 18, making socioeconomic value, environment, climate, accessibility, affordable fares and transport integration the leading objectives of the future Great British Railways. The duties would also help overcome subsidy control and competition law restrictions in the Bill, giving powers to integrate policy-making and investment funds.
Tabled by Chris Hinchliff MP, the passenger rights and public interest amendments are supported by a civil society coalition of 20 organisations and experts; with Disability Rights UK our latest supporter.
Full list of amendments we have recommended to the government:
30 (Public Interest Duties); 29 and 33 (Passenger and Disability Rights Duty); 34 (extend public sector equality duty); 49 (climate and modal shift duty); NC20 (transport integration duty); 54 (limit negative effects of competition); NC24 and NC25 (regional and national passenger representative committees, fully inclusive of disabled people).
We have also recommend further amendments to:
- Put passenger safety above competition.
- Redefine rail “infrastructure” for the modern age, bringing digital infrastructure, ticket retailing systems, research and development and cross-network services into public control, instead of being outsourced to the private sector Rail Delivery Group.
- Strike the Clause 20 duty to ‘promote competition’, which causes incoherence in the Bill and is a clear threat to regulatory standards. Since this duty does not have a strong legal basis, it is easily removed (this is because it is entirely separate from competition regulation, so its removal does not in any way threaten compliance with competition law or the overall structure of the Bill). If this duty cannot be struck, its damage should be limited by Amendment 54.
The Commons debate and Third Reading of the Bill takes place tomorrow (Wednesday 10th June). If our amendments do not pass then, we will pursue them to the next stage in the House of Lords.
Leave a Reply