HOLYROOD and Westminster are on a collision course over UK Government plans to overhaul control of the railways.
Downing Street has announced a new body, Great British Railways (GBR), will take over responsibility for both tracks and trains.
Despite the name, GBR will primarily operate in England, where it will set timetables and prices and sell tickets. It will also manage rail infrastructure in other parts of the UK. It will absorb Network Rail in a bid to end what the Department for Transport branded a "blame-game system" between train and track operations when disruption occurs.
In response to the news, Holyrood accused Westminster of failing to respect devolved control of the railway in Scotland.
It has sparked fresh calls for transport powers to be fully devolved to Edinburgh.
The Scottish Government, which is planning to nationalise train services by March 2022, said: “There is no mention of Scotland in these details, and it is not clear how these proposals will respect the established and successful devolved responsibility for railways in Scotland.
“The white paper will affect Scotland's Railway, yet the Scottish Government has not been consulted on what is now published.
“Our view remains that a public sector controlled, aligned and better integrated railway will deliver for Scotland’s economy and its communities.
"Full devolution of our railways is necessary to ensure that we can deliver the high performing and responsive services that Scotland’s communities and its economy deserves.
"We have made these points strongly and repeatedly to the UK Government, which has chosen to ignore the views of Scottish ministers who fund Scotland’s Railway.”
READ MORE: Home Office vows to deport Indian men freed from dawn raid in Glasgow
The UK Government plan is based on the recommendations of a review of the industry carried out by former British Airways chief executive Keith Williams following the chaotic introduction of new timetables in May 2018. It was initially due to be published in autumn 2019 but was delayed by the general election and the coronavirus pandemic.
Boris Johnson said: "I am a great believer in rail, but for too long passengers have not had the level of service they deserve. By creating Great British Railways, and investing in the future of the network, this Government will deliver a rail system the country can be proud of."
GBR is not expected to be established until 2023.
The plan has also been heavily criticised by unions and opposition politicians.
Manuel Cortes, leader of the Transport Salaried Staffs Association, said: “The Conservatives have admitted that their Frankenstein privatisation experiment on our railways has failed and the franchising of train services has hit the buffers.
“Rather than take the bold action that our rail network desperately needs, this is an attempt merely to paper over the cracks.
“A concessions-based model will still see passengers and taxpayer money leak out of our industry in the form of dividend payments for the greedy shareholders of the private operators who will hold them.
“In some ways we are going back to the future with the creation of a strategic body for our railways. We used to have one called the Strategic Rail Authority and it was abolished because it failed to end fragmentation.”
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps faced questions about the plans in the Commons.
He told MPs: "This is not renationalisation, which this Government continues to believes failed the railways – rather it is a simplification.
"While Great British Railways acts as the guiding mind to co-ordinate the whole network, our plan will see greater involvement of the private sector.
"Private companies will be contracted to run the trains and services, and fares will be set by Great British Railways.
"But it'll work more like London buses and London Overground - delivered by private companies but branded as a single national service."
Labour's shadow transport secretary Jim McMahon said: "While I welcome steps to increase public ownership and control over the railways, as you'd expect, it doesn't go far enough in this current plan.
"I believe there is ample proof that demonstrates that fuller public ownership rather than a concessionary model would better serve the state, the public and long-term investment."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel