Letter: Rail Bill unscathed?

Mr John Prescott,Mp
Saturday 06 November 1993 00:02 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Christian Wolmar writes that the Railways Bill 'has passed almost unscathed through Parliament' (report, 5 November). He has clearly not taken the trouble to read it.

During the past 10 months, this Bill has gained an additional 22 clauses, three major schedules and 78 pages of amendments. I would hardly call that unscathed. It is impossible to explain every change in such limited space, but I would like to highlight a few significant amendments to this Bill.

On pensions, although we have not achieved everything we set out to, fundamental concessions have been wrought from the Government, not least the continuation of an industry-wide scheme. We have also established the principle of BR's right to bid - going against the very heart of this legislation - although it will be restricted.

And I am sure that the Regulator has noticed that he will now have to defer directly to the Secretary of State in matters of control, and that the original limits on his budget have been lifted entirely.

Obviously, transport correspondents cannot be expected to follow all the political implications of a Bill's passage through Parliament, but it would be hoped they could at least compare the original Bill with the final version, and check the facts with those involved in order properly to assess Department of Transport press releases.

Yours sincerely,

JOHN PRESCOTT

Shadow Employment Secretary

House of Commons

London, SW1

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in