Member

What would my Amendment 3 do? It takes out “only” so that, when the Secretary of State is in the position of having to secure the provision of railway services, the Secretary of State would not have to do so only by direct award to a public sector operator but, as Amendment 5 would add, would offer the option to do so by means of the provision of a contract to a person who won a competitive award following an invitation to tender. I freely admit that that is not the Government’s policy. My question to the Government by means of this amendment is: is it wise for them so to bind themselves that, when franchises end, under no circumstances could they contemplate that it would be in the interests of passengers and the various other duties to have competition? The Minister confirmed that a number of duties are placed upon the Secretary of State under Section 4 of the Railways Act 1993, including Section 4(1)(d) relating to the promotion of competition, which I think can sometimes be satisfied only by the potential use of competitive tendering in order to deliver private sector as well as public sector operators for aspects of the operation of the railways.