Proceeding contribution from John McDonnell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 19 October 2010. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Railway Industry.
Railway Industry
I could not have said that more eloquently. My hon. Friend makes an extremely valid point. I urge the Government to tread carefully when making decisions on franchising and the integration of track with operations, because we have seen what has happened elsewhere. Mr Armitt said that when companies have gained franchises in other sectors, they seek to ““sweat the assets”” to maximise their profits. That eventually has an implication for safety. Having a nationally integrated system would overcome those issues. My hon. Friend also referred to the transaction costs involved both in that sort of breaking up and in individual franchising. The Government should carefully examine Roy McNulty's work and the transaction costs that will result. On London Underground, I was assured by the previous Government that Metronet was a one-off failure and that Tube Lines would be secure, but we then had the failure of Tube Lines. The estimated cost of those franchises and setting up the public-private partnership was £400 million on consultancies, accountants and lawyers alone. The Government should learn lessons from the past. On London Underground staffing, despite what people read in newspapers, RMT and TSSA have taken industrial action because 800 jobs will go if London Underground does not reconsider its position. Those 800 staff are based at stations including Hayes and Harlington in my constituency. If we lose those staff, we lose security and safety at those stations in the lead-up to the London Olympics. We are trying to put on a display for the world so that when people come here to enjoy the Olympics, they can travel in comfort and absolute safety. It would be a retrograde, short-sighted step to lay off those 800 staff, particularly at this key time. I urge London Underground to return to the negotiating table and to seek a settlement with the two unions. Otherwise, there may be a long, bitter and protracted dispute that will affect the travelling public in a way that will jeopardise their safety in the long term. The dispute is a principled one. It is not about wages, but about looking after the safety of the travelling public. That is why I support it and have appeared on picket lines. There may be a role for the Government. If London Underground remains intransigent, the Government should intervene, because the matter is important. I welcome this important debate engendered by my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran. I urge the Minister to meet the union groups, to discuss the McNulty report on the long-term future, and perhaps to return to the matter in six months to monitor progress on the Government's initial decisions.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 516 c190-1WH
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Capital investment Elizabeth line Fares Fees and charges Infrastructure Freight Franchises High speed trains Pay Managers Railways Railway network London Underground Network Rail Scotland Strikes Jarvis Rail Value for Money Review
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 21:24:35 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_670823
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_670823
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_670823