Photo: Miken / Pexels
The Railways Bill promises to change who runs the railway. I'm more interested in whether it changes what happens when a disabled passenger tries to catch a train.
A ramp's no good if nobody knows where it is. An accessible booking system isn't much use if it ends with a phone number. And a beautifully written policy is worthless when the last train's cancelled and nobody has a plan.
I've spent years dealing with the gap between what an organisation says about accessibility and what happens when somebody actually turns up. The railway has examples of all three, which is why the current debate about the Railways Bill matters.
The Government wants Great British Railways to bring together responsibility for trains and infrastructure. That has obvious potential. When different organisations control the track, the station, the train and the assistance, it's remarkably easy for everyone to point at somebody else when a journey fails.
But bringing those organisations together won't, by itself, make a railway accessible. The question is what the new organisation will be required to deliver, how we'll know whether it has delivered it, and what happens if it hasn't.
A duty to consider access isn't the same as a duty to improve it
On 13 October, Transport for All renewed its call for stronger accessibility provisions as the Bill goes through the House of Lords. Its concern isn't that disabled passengers have been forgotten in the drafting. They've been mentioned. Its concern is that the proposed duties may not be strong enough to produce measurable improvements.
There's a world of difference between considering accessibility and making something accessible. You can hold meetings, consult everyone, commission a strategy and still leave a disabled passenger standing on a platform with no way of getting home.
The Commons Transport Committee made much the same point when it scrutinised the Bill.
The Access Advantage: Subscribers Only
This article continues in The Access Advantage
The full article looks at what the Commons Transport Committee asked for, why the Equality Act already gives disabled passengers rights the Bill shouldn't blur, what a successful journey really takes, and the questions every venue, attraction and business should ask about its own customer journey.
Subscribers get monthly legal briefings translated into operational language, direct access to ask one question per month answered personally, and first sight of every tool and framework before public release.
Subscribe to read in full£14.99/month or £150/year.
What's in the full article
The law we already have
Why the anticipatory duty and the public sector equality duty do different jobs, and why a new structure shouldn't blur them.
A journey, not a facility
What has to work for a wheelchair, blind or Deaf passenger to get from booking to home.
Questions for your business
Practical tests for any venue or attraction, including what happens when the lift fails.
Chris Fry
Accessibility specialist and legal professional, based in Sheffield. Postgraduate legal qualifications, CEDR mediation accreditation. Contributor to House of Lords and Commons Select Committee proceedings and Court of Appeal cases. Founder, Strategic Access Advisory Limited.
This is analysis of the ongoing Railways Bill debate. It isn't a report of a new judgment, or of a development first published on 18 October 2026. It provides general legal and operational information and isn't legal advice on the circumstances of any particular organisation.
Sources and further reading
- Transport for All, “Will the House of Lords improve accessibility in the Railways Bill?”, 13 October 2026
- House of Commons Transport Committee, Railways Bill report, 10 February 2026
- Equality and Human Rights Commission, Services Code of Practice, Chapter 7: reasonable adjustments, 5 August 2026
- UK Parliament, Railways Bill continues Lords committee stage, 16 October 2026
- Hansard, Railways Bill, Lords Grand Committee, 16 September 2026