The government has reaffirmed its commitment to making Britain’s railway more accessible, while signalling a tougher, more financially disciplined approach to how upgrades are chosen and delivered.
In a statement from the Minister of State for Transport, Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill, Ministers positioned accessibility as both a social priority and an economic enabler—helping more people travel independently, supporting participation in work and education, and strengthening local connectivity. But the message to the rail industry was equally clear: future promises will be made only where delivery is affordable and represents value for money for passengers and taxpayers.
That tone matters. As the sector moves towards the establishment of Great British Railways (GBR), accessibility is being framed not just as a compliance obligation, but as a core part of a modernised railway—yet one that must be delivered through robust governance, transparent prioritisation, and funding realism.
Access for All: strong delivery record, rising expectations
The Access for All (AfA) programme has been running since 2006 and has delivered step-free accessible routes at more than 270 stations. It remains the government’s flagship mechanism for improving station access, typically through lifts, ramps, footbridges, and related infrastructure that supports passengers with reduced mobility, luggage, prams, or temporary injuries.
However, the minister highlighted a key challenge inherited from the previous government. In May 2024, feasibility work was announced for 50 stations—but without clear funding plans. That announcement, the statement suggests, created significant expectations among passengers, local stakeholders, and MPs, even though the route to delivery was uncertain.
Ministers have now reviewed the initial feasibility work and confirmed which of those 50 schemes will progress, using four criteria:
- Busy stations, where upgrades benefit significant numbers of passengers
- A good geographic spread across Wales, Scotland, and regions of England
- Use of pre-existing technical development work, to accelerate delivery
- Third-party funding contributions, reflecting limited central budgets
For rail leaders, this provides a clear indication of where policy is heading: projects that are “shovel-ready”, high-impact, and co-funded will move faster.
Eight stations move directly into delivery
From the 50 feasibility sites, eight projects will progress directly to delivery:
- Ash Vale
- Colchester
- Port Sunlight
- Thirsk
- Walton (Merseyside)
- Bellgrove
- Aigburth (already in delivery)
- Rock Ferry (already in delivery)
For operators and station teams, these announcements bring immediate operational implications—planning around works, maintaining customer information quality, and managing accessibility during construction. For suppliers and delivery partners, it provides a defined pipeline with momentum.
23 stations progress to detailed design
A further 23 stations will move into detailed design, a crucial stage that determines buildability, cost certainty, and deliverability in complex station environments.
The stations listed are:
Battle; Bodmin Parkway; Bredbury; Castle Cary; Dalston Kingsland; Dorchester South; Esher; Falkirk Grahamston; Flowery Field; Gunnersbury; Hedge End; High Brooms; Kew Bridge; Kidbrooke; Marden; Newton for Hyde; Raynes Park; Ruabon; Shotton; Swanwick; Ulverston; Wymondham; Yeovil Junction.
For the rail industry, “detailed design” is often where risk either reduces—or grows. Ground conditions, access constraints, possessions, utilities, and stakeholder requirements can all reshape scope and cost. The government’s decision to push these schemes forward indicates confidence in the early feasibility findings, but also recognition that more work is needed before committing to full delivery.
19 projects paused—for now
Ministers confirmed that 19 stations will not progress at this point, including Bushey, Dumbarton Central, Inverurie, Maidstone West, Neath, South Croydon, Upminster, Whitchurch (Shropshire), and Wivelsfield among others.
The minister stated that MPs representing all 50 stations have been contacted, with meetings offered to explain decisions—particularly for those not moving forward. That approach signals a desire to manage expectations proactively and reduce uncertainty in affected communities.
Importantly, “not progressing at this point” is not necessarily a permanent stop. The statement leaves the door open to future rounds.
Next steps: Spending Review, GBR reform, and co-funding
A future round of Access for All may be funded as part of the next Spending Review. While the process and timings for identifying future schemes have not yet been decided, the government has committed to reforming the programme as GBR takes shape.
A notable shift is the emphasis on third-party contributions as a “key consideration” in future selection. This reflects funding constraints, but also an increasingly place-based model of delivery—where local authorities, developers, or regional bodies may help unlock station upgrades that support housing growth, employment access, and regeneration.
To support this, officials will work with Network Rail to develop guidance on best practice for assembling local funding packages—an important step that could help standardise approaches and accelerate delivery.
Legacy projects: difficult decisions on five schemes
The statement also addressed a backlog of legacy AfA projects initiated under the previous government. While Ministers remain committed to delivering the majority, five schemes have been deferred or paused:
- Beaconsfield – deferred to Control Period 8 (2029–2034) to align with drainage renewal works
- Brondesbury – deferred to 2028/29 to align with platform renewal works
- Cricklewood – indefinitely deferred due to disruption and cost outweighing benefits
- Ockenden – indefinitely deferred as the station is already highly accessible
- Palmers Green – indefinitely deferred due to disruption and cost outweighing benefits
For rail managers, this underlines a key reality: accessibility delivery is increasingly being judged through a whole-system lens—balancing passenger benefit against operational disruption, timetable impacts, and affordability.
What this means for the sector
The message from the government is not that accessibility is being downgraded—far from it. Instead, it is being embedded into a more structured investment framework ahead of GBR, where delivery readiness, passenger impact, and partnership funding will shape outcomes.
For the industry, the priority now is to deliver the confirmed schemes efficiently, communicate transparently with passengers during works, and build stronger local funding partnerships so more stations can progress in future rounds.
Image credit: iStock
