HS2: Campaigners Vow To Fight On, As Government Expected To Give Green-Light To Project

Pa11626743

The Huffington Post UK   Dina Rickman First Posted: 09/01/12 18:08 GMT Updated: 10/01/12 12:31 GMT

Campaigners have vowed to fight on as the government prepares to give a £32bn HS2 high speed rail project the go-ahead - and MPs continue to question if tracks will ever be laid down.

The proposals, announced two years ago by Labour, would allow passengers to get between London and the Midlands at speeds of up to 250mph, and are supported in theory by all three parties.

Business leaders, trade unions and economists have all spoken out in favour of the new rail link.

Wouter Schuitemaker, investment director at the Business Birmingham organisation, has even labelled the project "essential" for economic growth in the UK".

But there has been widespread opposition to the plan, not least among Conservative MPs, many of whose Home Counties constituencies would see acres of green land carved up and turned into railway lines.

Opponents include Welsh secretary Cheryl Gillan, who rolled back from threats to resign from the Cabinet if the plan goes ahead but has said she won’t vote for the Bill.

While she is secretary of state for Wales, Gillan holds the Buckinghamshire seat of Chesham and Amersham.

Full coverage of the HS2 decision by the government:


Labour’s Maria Eagle, who expects extra measures to be announced by the government to protect the Chilterns in the final route, called the changes an “expensive fix”.

She accused the government of “spending hundreds of millions of pounds in tunnelling to save the PM from an embarassing Cabinet resignation.”

It’s not just MPs who are getting het-up over HS2. John Cartwright, Conservative leader of Aylesbury Vale district council in Buckinghamshire says the plans are costing Cameron core support.

“David Cameron is running the risk of losing that traditional support, and he may pay very heavily for it,” he told Huff Post UK.

“I don’t think he realises the actual political effect of going ahead. He will lose seats, he will lose Tory seats, no question about that if it goes ahead. Why would these people vote Conservative?

“Why on earth would they? It will have an effect on councils and on MPs. So much so that if you think about his precarious position at this moment in time with the coalition etc, etc, he couldn’t get a majority last time..

“If he takes 20 Conservative MPs outside and shoots them he won’t get a majority.”

Cartwright says his council is one of the 18 in the so-called ‘51m’ group, a collective of county and district councils, named after the figure they claim HS2 will cost every parliamentary constituency.

The group will meet as soon as the transport secretary announces whether HS2 is getting the go-ahead, to try to fight the decision in a judicial review. He believes the argument will not be won anywhere apart from a court of law.

“I went to a reception at 10 Downing Street at the invitation of the prime minister, who I met. We discussed the different parts of the world we represented and he noted we were fairly close together. I said ‘that’s right’ and he said ‘one thing we’re not going to talk about tonight is HS2’ and I said ‘Sir, you can hide but you can’t avoid the problem.’”

Tory MP Tony Baldry, whose North Oxfordshire constituency will be affected by the route, believes the whole thing might not happen at all, whatever Justine Greening announces.

“Let’s put it this way. When the M40 extension was agreed in the mid 1950s it took until the 1980s until it was actually built. Until they actually start laying track I don’t think there’s any certainty it will actually be built. I think that’s all the more reason, given the huge sums involved, one needs to be satisfied that one’s getting good value for the taxpayer. ”

The parliamentary arithmetic is crude. If the decision went to a vote now, the government are likely to win - even if they lack the support of one of their cabinet members. Baldry says there are “at most” 30 MPs from all parties against HS2 and willing to defy a whip.

“I think that the opponents of HS2 are going to have to think very carefully through their tactics about how they deal with this issue at Westminster.

“Organisations such as the Taxpayers’ Alliance who are very concerned about the cost of HS2 and its impact will start flagging up to MPs that this is going to have an impact on their constituencies.

“If it goes ahead the government will have less money than they have at present for infrastructure projects, building hospitals, new schools in their patch.”

As for the campaigners themselves? They’ve vowed not to give up. HS2 Action Alliance director Hilary Wharf pledged that “the opposition will continue to get stronger.”

“Politically it's quite a strange decision for a Tory government to take. But to be fair it's not actually that particular route, the particular point is that it's a waste of money and the wrong priority. The business case itself is completely exaggerated. We don't believe that HS2 can cure the north-south divide.

“We are confident that HS2 will never be built. Look at the third runway at Heathrow. The facts are actually on our side. We will just keep reminding people what the facts are.”

Philip Hammond, the former transport secretary, accused many who opposed the HS2 plans of NIMBYism. But HS2 Action Alliance director Hilary Wharf said: “We are not NIMBYs. I’m an economist. Yes, it does go near me. But there is an economic and environmental case. Ultra high-speed isn’t green.”

HS2: The facts

Who’s for it: It’s an unlikely union between big business, the unions and all three political parties. In fact, at first glance it seems everyone’s for it.

Who’s against it:
The Countryside Alliance, the Taxpayers' Alliance, and a handful of MPs.

The benefits: According to a letter by business leaders publish in the Daily Telegraph last week, it will make us rich.

"The absence of a high-speed rail line connecting the northern parts of Britain to London and the European Union is a continuous embarrassment to those promoting British business overseas," they wrote.

The negatives: According to council leader John Cartwright: “It’s destroying my countryside, in a nutshell. It’s absolutely splitting the land that I represent, the area I represent, in half.”

The worst case scenario, according to Tony Baldry MP: “There being a commitment to build HS2 but the actual work not starting because when it comes to the actual time the Treasury turning round and saying ‘terribly sorry, we actually haven’t got the money this year.’”

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

Campaigners have vowed to fight on as the government prepares to give a £32bn HS2 high speed rail project the go-ahead - and MPs continue to question if tracks will ever be laid down. The proposal...
Campaigners have vowed to fight on as the government prepares to give a £32bn HS2 high speed rail project the go-ahead - and MPs continue to question if tracks will ever be laid down. The proposal...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 23
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whapgra
01:40 AM on 01/13/2012
with the rising cost of rail fares who will be able to travel on it
10:35 AM on 01/10/2012
32Billion estimate to commence with - the Olympics commenced at 2.7Billion and is now about 8Billion...so this rail link will probably come in at 100Billion.........all to save 20 minutes on the existing time between London and Birmingham?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OH72
12:29 PM on 01/28/2012
Wrong. First, you ignore that there have been comparable projects elsewhere. 32 billion is already far more than the costs for the track alone and includes plenty of collateral positions

Second, it's not to save 20 minutes. It's to get people off the road, out of planes and into a mode of transportation that's safe AND fast. And the line can be expanded in the future. It's also to get some modern infrastructure that's actually worth that name, which will benefit the areas around it.

Seriously, go and look at the effect of HSR in other countries. Relatively small and remote towns suddenly were effectively part of larger agglomerations miles away and consequentially saw businesses moving there. Plus you can use the rail building to actually improve other infrastructure as well - the logistics for building the tracks are likely to require roads in the area being modernised, too, and the line itself can also double up as being the route of new fibreoptic backbones ofr high speed internet if one plans accordingly - no need to tear up the ground twice.
03:25 PM on 01/28/2012
Yes but b ased on the latest figures for the Olympics last week, now risen to 12 Billion from an initial "just less than 3 billion" in less than six years - I guess the initial rail project of 32Billion will easily top the 100 Billion.......not so many other projects of about 100 Billion is there - unless it's raising the Titantic, draining the Pacific Ocean I suppose?

Second it is to save 20 minutes travel and the money will partly be coming from the duty motorists currently paid on road fuel - so they'll in future be able to pay through the nose for rail travel and save paying over 300 pecent fuel duty and VAT to the Chancellor and be paying to private rail companies for shareholders? Dream on.

Seriously go and look at HSR in Holland - they are mainly empty due to the high costs of travel......so what does that bode for the London to Birmingham HS rail link - either increase the cost of fuel duty and bleed the motorist into using the rail then change to a bus/taxi service at the other end?

Sorry, I just can't support the HS rail link. Mind you it won't be passing my home, so good luck to you.
09:54 AM on 01/10/2012
We would still have a decent rail network if that pratt Dr Beeching had not interfered with it. I do hope he is not resting in peace!
08:39 AM on 01/10/2012
We desperately need better infrastructure. The skies are crowded as is the roads so the answer I feel is the concept of monorail this being not subject to floods taking up less agricultural land plus a method of carrying power and optics etc.
11:45 PM on 01/09/2012
I will not ride on it. How can you guarantee the security of the track these days?
10:50 PM on 01/09/2012
WHOOPI! THAT WILL PLEASE THE ARAB SHEIKS BECAUSE THEY WILL BE THE ONLY ONES WHO CAN AFFORD TO RIDE ON IT.
10:20 PM on 01/09/2012
Luckily for fare-payers, the gold-plating of the route to preserve the property values of Tory Buckinghamshire can be dropped, since construction won't start until after the next election.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ppenguinator
Life's too imprtant to be taken seriously.
09:55 PM on 01/09/2012
I'm not really against the HS2, but I think the money could be much better spent improving our existing public transport. It would be much more useful to the average person.
09:22 PM on 01/09/2012
Eric14 makes a valid point though skirts the real issue. For years uk PLC has lagged behind the rest of europe because of the nimby's who seem to always want to stop any kind of progress. For years I've argued for an integrated transport policy. One which makes it easy and cost effective to travel by public transport. Haven't these nimby-ites never heard of the coming 'petroleum spike'?? Even the Italians have built an HST link between Milano and Roma, on time, on budget and which runs to sxhedule!! How the hell are we supposed to compete when (a) we can't decide on a damn route and (b) we've allowed the closure or takeover of the manufacturing plants which might have made the trains to run on it??
07:46 PM on 01/09/2012
It'll give the government something to cancel in a couple of years when they change their minds because of rising costs.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
uksnapper
07:43 PM on 01/09/2012
We should accept a well constructed rail network running wherever its best to run it.If peoples houses need requisitioning do it but pay them twice market value to make it worth their while same with other property owners,its just property.We expect our armed forces to lay down their lives for us doing their job,losing a house is,by comparison,nothing at all.
07:47 PM on 01/09/2012
That is not how to make a point. The comparison does not work.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
uksnapper
08:08 PM on 01/09/2012
fair comment
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whapgra
06:57 AM on 01/10/2012
I have read your comment three times and have come to the conclusion that I have wasted my time reading it, as it is complete nonsense.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
uksnapper
07:40 PM on 01/09/2012
HS2 will be like Concord,superb looking,a great performer but only of real value to a few people.
Capacity NOT speed is the key to a railway of the future.
We need the Jumbo Jet of the railways,wider tracks wider taller and longer carriages with far greater capacity than is current.We need to get far more freight on the rail system,a system to carry us forward into 2100 and beyond.
HS2 is the result of small minded people with no vision of a future britain and who have been lobbied by the people who stand to make most money from this venture with total disregerd to our real future needs.
The cost will,as with all government projects at least double and the "Investors" will rake in the profit at the taxpayers expense.
Shameful but realistic.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OH72
12:35 PM on 01/28/2012
No, not realistic, but uninformed. It is clear you've never, ever, looked at existing HSR systems.

Germany has touble-train ICEs, France is building two-floor TGVs. And if you look at the costs for building their tracks, you have a clear measure of what is realistic costs for the HS2 line. The lines used for HSR, at least in Germany, are also used for freight - all you need is good planning to ensure freight trains are not blocking the line for the fast passenger trains.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
uksnapper
01:25 PM on 01/28/2012
plenty of info here
http://citytransport.info/Long.htm>
The distance between stops ie London to Birmingham,of 120 miles does not warrant,it seems to me,a dedicated high speed line.
If you want to transport a lot of people or goods you need higher capacity rather than faster trains,again because the actual journeys are relatively short.
If longer runs of say 200+miles were involved then I would accept that high speed would be an overall benefit.
And I have both looked and travelled on HSR
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OH72
12:35 PM on 01/28/2012
Make that double-train ICEs
photo
Reality always bites
Sometimes just a bit peckish
07:19 PM on 01/09/2012
FFS we cannot afford another multi billion pound investment. Improve the transport links already in place- Fix the potholes, execute scrap metal thieves, make J Clarkson walk everywhere!