Source · Select Committees · Transport Committee
Recommendation 10
10
Accepted in Part
Amend the Bill to require parliamentary oversight of the Long Term Rail Strategy.
Recommendation
There is inevitably a tension between realising the value of a truly long- term strategy and recognising that governments must retain discretion and flexibility. It is essential that the Long Term Rail Strategy does not lose continuity and become in effect a series of short-term strategies. The Bill should be amended to require that the Strategy be laid before Parliament, and that, where the Secretary of State makes substantive changes, it be required to be laid again in its amended form. (Recommendation, Paragraph 29)
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the Committee’s concerns about the speed of referral and agrees that it is critical that passenger issues are dealt with appropriately, effectively, and swiftly. The provisions outlined in the Bill regarding this will therefore be supported by a Memorandum of Understanding agreed between the Passengers’ Council and the ORR which will set out exactly how the two organizations will work together and the process and timeframes for enforcement referrals. The government would be happy to keep the Committee updated on the progress of this.
Government Response
Accepted in Part
HM Government
Accepted in Part
The Government partially agrees with this recommendation. The Government agrees with the Committee regarding the importance of the Passengers’ Council being trusted to carry out its role. As recognised by the Committee, disabled passengers already face an unacceptable number of obstacles when trying to raise complaints. That is why the Government is committed to establishing a strengthened Passengers’ Council that will be able to champion the experience of disabled passengers and address the barriers that have prevented improvements. It is only by sufficiently empowering the Council that it will truly be able to achieve this. The Government also agrees that it would be extremely unlikely that the Council would refer any issues to the ORR that were not serious, important and thoroughly investigated. However, this does not mean that the ORR should be bound to take action, and the Government therefore disagrees with the recommended amendment as a result. The Government is clear that the ORR will not be able to ignore the Council. However, as the Council will champion passengers’ interests, it will not have the neutrality needed to be an enforcement body in the same way that the ORR as the overarching sector regulator will. The Council will have a sole focus on the passenger, so it will not have the wider perspective of other challenges facing the railway that the regulator will. For example, it would always find in favour of passengers compared to freight customers. That is why it is vital that the ORR, as the independent rail regulator, satisfies itself against its own duties and obligations that enforcement action is appropriate and what form this will take. The ORR must then inform the Passengers’ Council of what action it took and the rationale for it. However, the Government acknowledges the Committee’s concerns about the speed of referral and agrees that it is critical that passenger issues are dealt with appropriately, effectively, and swiftly. The provisions outlined in the Bill regarding this will therefore be supported by a Memorandum of Understanding agreed between the Passengers’ Council and the ORR which will set out exactly how the two organisations will work together and the process and timeframes for enforcement referrals. This will ensure a seamless experience for addressing the most important issues affecting the passenger experience on the railway. The Government would be happy to keep the Committee updated on the progress of this.