Source · Select Committees · Transport Committee
7th Report - Rail investment pipelines: ending boom and bust
Transport Committee
HC 575
Published 10 February 2026
Recommendations
12
Accepted in Part
Require a high viability bar for RNEP projects and regular review by key bodies.
Recommendation
The RNEP should not become an unfunded wishlist: there must be a high bar of viability for projects to be included, and a commensurately high bar for any subsequent decision to remove them from the pipeline. The inclusion and status …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government agrees any pipeline must clearly distinguish between funded commitments and earlier-stage proposals. They recognize the Committee's interest in greater clarity on the level and source of funding committed to individual schemes and will set out scheme-level funding allocations.
Department for Transport
View Details →
13
Accepted in Part
Implement ORR's review findings and identify RNEP projects suitable for private sector investment.
Recommendation
The RNEP should also be a tool for promoting rail infrastructure investment from sources other than central government. We urge the Government to implement the findings of the Office of Rail and Road’s review of the Rail Network Investment Framework, …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government supports private investment in rail where it delivers value for money, but will signal opportunities through pipeline publications and structured market engagement rather than using the RNEP as a general prospectus.
Department for Transport
View Details →
14
Accepted in Part
Identify regional schemes in the RNEP and include all devolved authority enhancement projects.
Recommendation
The RNEP should also identify those schemes which are most appropriate for funding and delivery at a regional level, such as those where alignment with national objectives is not sufficient to warrant full central government funding but which would be …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The Enhancements Portfolio and the associated pipeline publications will provide visibility of regionally led and co-funded schemes where they affect the national network, supporting alignment with national objectives and full transparency for industry.
Department for Transport
View Details →
15
Accepted in Part
Promptly reflect outcomes of Spending Reviews and government announcements in RNEP updates.
Recommendation
The 2025 Spending Review has provided welcome clarity on what inherited enhancements the Department is proceeding with and those which it has decided to pause. Such announcements do not, however, provide 51 information in the format or detail necessary to …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government agrees with the importance of transparency and forward visibility, stating they are moving towards more regular, structured, and accessible publication of the enhancements portfolio; they will set out a potential pipeline that will provide an indicative view of strategically aligned schemes.
Department for Transport
View Details →
Conclusions (2)
8
Conclusion
Accepted in Part
The Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline (RNEP) was a sound idea, undermined by a chronic lack of updates and by poor decisions to add immature or unfunded projects to the list. If these weaknesses were 50 addressed, it could form the basis of mature, informed communication with the rail sector and …
Government Response Summary
The Government agrees that smoothing workload is important but does not agree that making changes to the funding method is the right solution. Government agrees that the pipeline must clearly distinguish between funded commitments and earlier-stage proposals but does not support publishing extended indicative pipelines that imply funding commitment and instead will use a clearly defined potential pipeline that will provide directional visibility without undermining fiscal credibility.
17
Conclusion
Accepted in Part
The pattern of boom and bust has been especially apparent in rolling stock investment. There is widespread agreement, including from the Government, that the absence of a long-term rolling stock strategy, aligned to a similar strategy for infrastructure, has resulted in damaging missed opportunities and fluctuations in orders over many …
Government Response Summary
The government agrees that the experience of Control Period transitions should be examined, including the start of CP7 and the potential for volatility within Control Periods so that lessons can be learned to strengthen mobilisation, sequencing and improve delivery for the supply chain but does not agree that this requires commissioning and publishing an independent review in advance of the establishment of Great British Railways; this work can be taken forward through existing assurance and regulatory processes to inform GBR and future Funding Period arrangements.