Rail
Rail services, fares, and infrastructure
Based on 8 parliamentary votes
Related Transport Issues
How Parties Voted on Rail
Government alignment shows how often each party voted with the government's stated position. Issue-aligned direction shows agreement with the AI-identified supportive stance.
Voted with government positionVoted in issue-aligned direction
Recent Votes
| Vote | Result | Date |
|---|---|---|
MPs voted on a reasoned amendment to block the Railways Bill from proceeding to its next stage. The Bill proposes bringing train operating companies into public ownership, with the government arguing nationalisation will improve reliability and end decades of dysfunction, while opponents raised concerns about whether public ownership actually delivers better services. Yes = Support blocking the Railways Bill, expressing scepticism that nationalising train operators will improve passenger services · No = Support the Railways Bill proceeding, backing the government's plan to bring railways into public ownership to improve reliability and performance Govt: No | 169-333 | 9 Dec 2025 |
MPs voted on whether to pass the Railways Bill at its Second Reading, which would bring private train operating companies into public ownership and create a new publicly-run national rail operator. The government argued nationalisation would end decades of dysfunction and fragmentation on the railways. Yes = Support nationalising rail services under public ownership to improve reliability and coordination of the railway network · No = Oppose rail nationalisation, arguing public ownership has not improved services and that the bill's approach is misguided Govt: Aye | 330-173 | 9 Dec 2025 |
MPs voted on whether to reject a Lords amendment to the rail nationalisation bill that would have required the government to put passengers at the heart of decision-making by tracking and publishing performance data relevant to passenger experience. The government wanted to remove this amendment and proceed with nationalising passenger rail services without this statutory obligation. Yes = Support the government rejecting the Lords amendment, proceeding with rail nationalisation without a statutory passenger-focused performance data requirement · No = Support the Lords amendment, requiring the government to measure and publish passenger experience data to ensure nationalisation genuinely improves services rather than fulfilling an ideological goal Govt: Aye | 353-110 | 19 Nov 2024 |
The Lords had amended the rail nationalisation bill to explicitly require that improving passenger services be the primary purpose of the legislation, and that the Secretary of State must have regard to this when making decisions. The government voted to reject this Lords amendment, preferring the bill without this statutory passenger-outcome requirement. Yes = Support the government rejecting the Lords' addition of a statutory 'passenger improvement' purpose clause, keeping the bill as originally passed by the Commons · No = Support the Lords amendment requiring passenger service improvement to be the primary stated purpose of rail nationalisation, to hold the government accountable to passenger outcomes Govt: Aye | 347-173 | 19 Nov 2024 |
A vote on Amendment 21 to the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill during its Committee stage. Without debate excerpts, the specific content of the amendment is unknown, but the bill itself concerns bringing passenger rail services back into public ownership. Yes = Support Amendment 21 to the Public Ownership rail bill, likely an attempt to modify or restrict the bill's approach to rail nationalisation · No = Oppose Amendment 21, backing the government's bill to bring passenger rail services into public ownership without this modification Govt: No | 84-360 | 3 Sept 2024 |
A vote on Amendment 17 to the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill at Committee stage. Without debate excerpts, the specific content of this amendment is unknown, but the Bill's purpose is to bring passenger rail services back into public ownership, and this was a proposed change to that legislation during detailed scrutiny. Yes = Support Amendment 17 to the Public Ownership Rail Bill, likely reflecting opposition attempts to modify or constrain the nationalisation of passenger rail services · No = Reject Amendment 17, maintaining the Bill as drafted by the Labour government to bring passenger rail services into public ownership Govt: No | 114-373 | 3 Sept 2024 |
A vote on Amendment 14 to the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill during its Committee stage. Without debate excerpts, the precise content of the amendment is unknown, but the bill itself transfers passenger rail services back into public ownership, and this was a committee-stage attempt to modify it — almost certainly proposed by the opposition. Yes = Support amending the Public Ownership Rail Bill, likely to restrict, delay, or add conditions to the renationalisation of passenger rail services · No = Oppose the amendment, backing the government's original Bill to bring passenger rail services into public ownership without the proposed modification Govt: No | 113-363 | 3 Sept 2024 |
Vote on the Second Reading of the government's flagship bill to bring passenger rail services back into public ownership, ending the franchising system and transferring train operating companies to a new publicly-owned operator. Passing Second Reading allowed the bill to proceed through Parliament. Yes = Support renationalising passenger railway services and returning them to public ownership · No = Oppose renationalisation of rail, preferring continued private sector involvement in running train services Govt: Aye | 354-86 | 29 Jul 2024 |
How is this calculated?
Government alignment (primary bar) shows how often a party's MPs voted with the government's stated position on this issue. This is the most comparable metric across parties, as it measures the same reference point for everyone.
Issue-aligned direction (secondary bar) shows how often MPs voted in the direction tagged as supportive of this issue by AI analysis. For example, if a vote is tagged “pro-environment”, a Yes vote counts as aligned. This can be misleading when the tagged direction happens to align with opposition amendments rather than government bills.
Why these metrics may differ: Opposition parties often vote against government bills for strategic or procedural reasons, even when they broadly support the policy area. The government alignment metric makes this clearer by showing the actual voting pattern against a consistent reference.
Source: Commons division data from the UK Parliament Votes API. Alignment direction determined by AI analysis of vote stance tags. Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.