Official Report 514KB pdf
The next item of business is consideration of motion S6M-21168, a motion on legislative consent for the Railways Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees that the relevant provisions of the Railways Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 5 November 2025, relating to clauses 4, 7 to 10, 12, 18, 19, 22, 23, 25, 26, 28 to 35, 39, 43, 48, 66, 75, 78, 80, 81, 87 and 90, paragraphs 1, 2, 8 to 14 and 16 of schedule 2, paragraphs 4, 8, 9, 12 to 18, 22, 25, 26, 33 and 53 of schedule 3, new clauses 61, 62 and 64, new schedule 1, the amendments to clause 7 and clause 90, and the amendments to schedule 3 (inserting new paragraphs 22A, 23A, 24A, 25A, 32A, 33B, 34E, 34F, 34J, 34K, 34N, 35A and 36A to schedule 3), so far as these matters alter the executive competence of the Scottish Ministers, should be considered by the UK Parliament.—[Fiona Hyslop]
17:54
I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute, albeit briefly, to today’s debate on the legislative consent motion on the Railways Bill.
As colleagues know, the bill represents a significant reshaping of how rail services and rail infrastructure will be overseen across Great Britain. The Scottish Conservatives recognise that many of the revisions before us are technical in nature and that they follow extensive engagement between the two Governments. However, we also recognise that the bill will not alter the Scottish ministers’ existing powers over ScotRail and the Caledonian Sleeper or the funding and specification of rail infrastructure in Scotland. It is clear that, in several respects, the bill will strengthen formal consultation duties and will provide a clearer framework for interaction between the Governments. Those are sensible steps.
However, our party has a long-standing commitment to a rail system that grows instead of restricts choice, competition and freight capacity, which brings me to the principal issue that prevents me from supporting the LCM today. My concern is focused squarely on the future of open-access operators and freight services. Those operators, such as those running commercially on key inter-city corridors, have been a vital source of innovation, lower fares and improved customer experience. Likewise, freight operators depend on fair and transparent access to the network to support economic growth, decarbonisation and supply chain resilience.
Evidence that was considered by the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee made it clear that open-access operators remain unconvinced that the new arrangements will protect their ability to compete on a level playing field. The committee also heard that, although assurances have been offered at United Kingdom level, operators still fear being disadvantaged in a system in which Great British Railways becomes the dominant operator and the main decision maker on access.
We should not underestimate the value of open access to Scotland. Those services bring genuine choice to passengers and reduce pressure on taxpayer-funded operations, and they help to strengthen cross-border links that matter to our economy and our communities. Any framework that risks weakening that model, whether unintentionally or through lack of safeguards, must be approached with caution.
Similarly, on freight, Scotland has ambitious growth aspirations, but growth depends on confidence that freight paths will be protected, that investment will be worthwhile and that decisions affecting Scottish freight will be taken transparently and in the interests of the wider network. The bill includes duties relating to freight, but I remain unconvinced that those duties alone will offset the increased centralisation of access decisions.
For those reasons, although I acknowledge the Scottish Government’s satisfaction with the amendments that have been made thus far, I do not believe that the bill in its current form provides sufficient certainty for operators, passengers or freight customers who rely on open and competitive access to our railways.
The Scottish Conservatives cannot support the motion, but, equally, we recognise the technical nature of many of the provisions and the importance of continued co-operation around rail reform.
17:58
As colleagues know, I have consistently advocated for full devolution of Scotland’s railways to better integrate track and train. Unfortunately, the UK Government is not willing to pursue that change at this time. However, I have made it clear that the Scottish ministers would not accept any reduction in our existing devolved powers and that Scotland must benefit from rail reform to the same extent as the rest of Great Britain. The bill respects those requirements, and I and my officials have had long and extensive engagement with UK ministers and the Department for Transport to secure that position for Scotland.
The bill will create a new body—Great British Railways—which will operate, maintain and allocate access to rail infrastructure across the UK. GBR will also deliver passenger services that are currently the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Transport.
The Scottish ministers will retain their current devolved responsibilities, including securing the provision of ScotRail and the Caledonian Sleeper and specifying and funding rail infrastructure in Scotland. The bill will introduce new provisions that will strengthen accountability for rail infrastructure in Scotland to the Scottish ministers, including a new and improved infrastructure funding regime and, importantly, new powers for the Scottish ministers to issue guidance and directions to GBR on areas of rail outputs that we specify, fund and set strategy for.
The potential benefits of greater accountability over the infrastructure management cannot be overstated. Our experience of ScotRail and the Caledonian Sleeper coming into public ownership is that greater accountability to ministers results in better outcomes for passengers. Public ownership has allowed for significant benefits to passengers, such as the scrapping of peak fares. Since public ownership, ScotRail’s overall passenger satisfaction has consistently been among the highest across Great Britain, at 90 per cent, and the Scottish train performance measure also has ScotRail at around 90 per cent. ScotRail performs better on cancellations than most GB operators, and figures for 2024-25 show that ScotRail had around half as many cancellations as the GB average.
This Government is clear in its commitment to retaining the benefits of delivering passenger services in public ownership, and the bill does not change that. I support the policy intent of the bill, in particular its ambition to maximise the benefits of greater integration while respecting devolved arrangements. The Scottish Government supports open access and freight development and the LCM is about devolved responsibilities. The Scottish ministers therefore recommend that the Parliament should support the motion.
Agreeing to the LCM will help us to defend the powers of this Parliament on rail, just as, for the past 27 years, I have sought to defend, promote and protect the institution of this Parliament in which I have had the enormous privilege of serving. I thank all those who have been on the journey with me: parliamentary and constituency staff; members from all parties; and, of course, the people of Scotland, with their hopes and dreams of a Scotland that is fair and just for all and is the country that they know it can be.
The question on the motion will be put at decision time.