Railways Bill: Opposition Reasoned Amendment
170Ayes
332Noes
Defeated · majority 162 · Government won147 did not vote
649 Members · Aye 170 · No 332 · DNV 147 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted on 9 December 2025 to reject a Conservative reasoned amendment that sought to block the Railways Bill at Second Reading. A reasoned amendment is a procedural device that allows the opposition to oppose a bill's founding principles outright rather than let it proceed to further scrutiny. The amendment was defeated by 332 votes to 170. The Railways Bill would create Great British Railways (GBR), a new publicly owned body integrating responsibility for rail infrastructure and most passenger train services in Great Britain. Defeating this blocking amendment clears the way for the bill to pass its Second Reading and proceed through Parliament. The legislation would end the current fragmented franchise model, consolidate ticketing retail, set a freight growth target, and establish a new Passenger Watchdog. The vote divided along almost entirely partisan lines. All 283 Labour MPs and 34 Labour and Co-operative MPs who voted did so against the amendment, supporting the bill's passage. All 96 voting Conservatives and all 63 voting Liberal Democrats backed the amendment to block it, representing a rare point of agreement between the two opposition parties. The Democratic Unionist Party's four voting MPs also supported the amendment, as did two Reform UK MPs and two independents. The vote sits alongside the substantive Second Reading division held on the same day, which passed 329 to 173, formally sending the bill on to its next parliamentary stage.
Voting Aye meant
Support blocking the Railways Bill, opposing rail renationalisation and the creation of Great British Railways on the grounds that public ownership fails to deliver better services for passengers.
Voting No meant
Support the Railways Bill proceeding, backing the creation of Great British Railways and the integration of track and train under public ownership as the route to a better, more reliable railway.
Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.
Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped No
0
283
78
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
96
0
20
Liberal Democrats
Whipped Aye
62
0
9
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
0
34
8
Independent
—
3
7
3
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
—
2
0
6
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
4
0
1
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
1
1
Your Party
—
0
1
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
1
0
0
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
1
0
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
0
0
1
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
Supports the Bill as essential reform to unify fragmented railways, eliminate private profit, reduce management costs, and prioritise passengers through public ownership under GBR with stronger passenger watchdog.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,434 words) →
Opposes the Bill as ideological state control that weakens independent regulation, eliminates competition from open access operators, increases taxpayer subsidy without guaranteeing better services, and lacks performance standards.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,316 words) →
Acknowledges need for rail reform but opposes Bill as written; concerns include lack of passenger growth targets, excessive state micromanagement (citing DfT failures), insufficient protection for open access and freight, and vague criteria for access charges.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,295 words) →
Welcomes Bill as overdue reform ending 30 years of fragmentation; welcomes passenger watchdog and accessibility duties but seeks clarification on watchdog independence, disabled passenger protections, and conflict-of-interest safeguards.Labour (Transport Committee Chair) · Voted no · Read full speech (1,146 words) →
Opposes full nationalisation; supports uniting track and train (Conservative 2023 plan) but via concessionary model like TfL, not ideology-driven state control, and criticises lack of protections for Isle of Wight ferry connections.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,036 words) →
Strongly supports Bill; welcomes unified system allowing better planning, increased investment in south-west branches, Devon Metro proposal, and resilience improvements while supporting open access operators.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,031 words) →
Challenges government claim that nationalisation improves services; points to South Western Railway worsening (delays, cancellations) since public takeover in 2024.Liberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (87 words) →
Questions whether passengers care about organisational structure versus tangible improvements; notes 50% increase in SWR cancellations and 29% increase in delays since renationalisation.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (122 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0