The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Mark Harper) With
permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a statement on how
this Government are improving the journeys that matter most to the
British public. Our path to net zero remains ambitious, but we are
making that path more proportionate. We are backing Britain’s
drivers and slamming the brakes on anti-car policies. Thanks to
record Government investment, everyday journeys for more people in
more places will...Request free trial
The Secretary of State for Transport ( )
With permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a statement on
how this Government are improving the journeys that matter most
to the British public.
Our path to net zero remains ambitious, but we are making that
path more proportionate. We are backing Britain’s drivers and
slamming the brakes on anti-car policies. Thanks to record
Government investment, everyday journeys for more people in more
places will improve more quickly.
I wish to update the House on three long-term decisions we have
made to secure a brighter future, starting with zero-emission
vehicles. No one should doubt or play down Britain’s progress on
decarbonisation. “World leading” is not an exaggeration. We have
cut emissions faster than any G7 country, pledged a decarbonised
transport sector by 2050—the first major economy to do so—and
today we have laid another world-leading piece of legislation:
the zero-emission vehicle mandate. Manufacturers will now meet
minimum targets of clean car production, starting with 22% next
year and reaching 80% by 2030. It stands to be one of the largest
carbon-saving policies across Government, and manufacturers are
on board. They will deliver a mandate that they helped shape, a
product of partnership between this Government and industry that
has been not months but years in the making. These targets are
now embedded in their forecasts, and that certainty has inspired
investment, protected existing jobs and paved the way for new
jobs, too. Look at the past few months: BMW, Stellantis and Tata
are expanding their electric vehicle operations right across the
UK, from Oxford to Merseyside.
However, targets can be missed if Governments fail to take people
with them, and we will not make that mistake. So, people will be
able to buy new petrol and diesel cars until 2035, aligning the
UK with the likes of Canada, Australia and Germany. It is fairer
on British consumers, it allows us to grow the used EV
market—lowering costs and increasing choice—and it ensures we
raise confidence in our charging infrastructure. In fact, public
charge points are already up by 43% since last year and set to
grow even further thanks to investment from both the Government
and private sector.
For many, that is the future, but today, in some parts of the
country, drivers are being punished and cars vilified. The Mayor
of London’s expansion of the ultra low emission zone is forcing
drivers to sell up or pay hefty daily fines. Overzealous
enforcement practices—from yellow box junctions to blanket 20 mph
zones—are turning drivers into cash cows for councils. Measures
to overly restrict where and when people travel are already being
planned in places such as Oxfordshire. My message to councils is
simple: this anti-motorist campaign has run out of road. This
Government recognise that cars are not a luxury; they are a
lifeline. They are how most people in rural constituencies such
as mine access work, education and essential services. That is
why, after listening to the concerns of motorists, I have
announced a new long-term plan for drivers, with 30 measures that
will protect their rights to travel how they want, where they
want and when they want.
We will use AI technology to keep traffic flowing. We will build
a national parking platform to make it easier to find and pay for
a space. We will inject some common sense into enforcement: where
20 mph zones are necessary exceptions with local support, not a
blanket norm; where rules are enforced to keep our roads safe,
not to line council coffers; and where low traffic neighbourhoods
rely on public support, not on outdated covid guidance. How many
times drivers get from A to B will be their choice, not decided
by councils. None of that undermines our investments in public
transport, nor in active travel. We are pro public transport, but
we will not be anti-car. A sustainable transport network needs
both, so people can choose to travel in the way that best suits
them.
Let me now turn to our decision on HS2. With decades to wait
before it arrived and benefits dwindling, it risked crowding out
investment in other transport areas and no longer reflected
post-pandemic changes in travel. Despite that, some argue that we
should have carried on regardless—that a single rail line between
a handful of cities and London is more important than millions of
everyday journeys around the country. I disagree. The facts have
changed, so we are changing our approach. With work well under
way, we will finish HS2 between London Euston and the west
midlands. Just last week, I spoke to the Euston Partnership Board
on the huge regeneration opportunity that can be unlocked with
private investment. However, by stopping HS2 in Birmingham, we
can reinvest every penny of the £36 billion saved in transport
across the country, in the roads, the local bus services and the
regional train links—all those essential daily connections that
people rely on.
No region will lose out, receiving either the same, or more,
Government investment than under HS2. Almost £20 billion will go
to the north, with Bradford, ignored under previous proposals,
now getting a new station and faster rail connections to
Manchester. Northern Powerhouse Rail is now extended to include
Hull and Sheffield. A separate £12 billion fund will better
connect Liverpool and Manchester, and I have already spoken to
the Mayors of Greater Manchester and the Liverpool City Region to
kickstart work on that.
West Yorkshire, thanks to £2.5 billion of funding, will finally
get its mass transitsystem built in full. Over 20 road schemes
will be delivered, and crucially, we will more than double the
transport budgets of northern Mayors, benefiting our largest
cities and smallest towns.
We are also investing in the midlands, with almost £10 billion
ensuring the midlands rail hub is completed in full, increased
mayoral budgets, including £1.5 billion for the new east midlands
city region, and councils—from Stoke on Trent to
Lincolnshire—seeing long-term transport funding settlements for
the first time.
Finally, the remainder of this transformational investment will
be spread across the UK, including: extending the hugely popular
£2 bus fare cap, which people will see the benefit of just next
month; delivering the Ely junction project and north Wales
mainline electrification, benefiting both passengers and freight;
and dealing with the menace of potholes, with £8.3 billion in new
funding to resurface roads up and down the country. All told,
Network North is a new vision for transport—one that creates more
winners in more places, one that prioritises people’s everyday
journeys, and one that drives the growth and jobs that this
country needs.
I will finish with this: we will never shirk the long-term
decisions to secure this country’s future and we will always be
guided by the needs of the British people. When the majority want
a pragmatic route to net zero, we will back them. When drivers
feel unfairly targeted, we will back them. When the public want
us to focus on the journeys that matter most to them, we will
back them. This Government are delivering on the people’s
priorities. I commend this statement to the House.
7.01pm
(Sheffield, Heeley) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his
statement.
Let me start by saying how shocking it is that our first
opportunity to scrutinise the cancellation of Europe’s largest
infrastructure project comes two weeks after the announcement was
made. It shows sheer contempt for this House and the people
affected by this decision.
It is good to see the Transport Secretary in his place for a
change, but for once I am not holding him responsible. I know
that he was not in the room when these decisions were made and he
has my sympathy for having to try to make this absurd decision
look sensible. There is only one man who should take
responsibility for the sheer chaos, incompetence and desperation
that we have seen over the past two weeks: the Prime Minister.
Only he could announce the cancellation of HS2 to Manchester in
Manchester. Only he would have the brass neck to make that
decision without consulting our metro Mayors or any of the
communities and businesses that depend on the project. Only he
would announce a plan for drivers, as car insurance and petrol
prices soar, that makes no mention of the cost of living, and
when, just six months earlier, he personally had kicked every
future road project into the next decade. Only he would insult
the north with a back of the fag packet plan that he has
announced in its place.
The consequences of this shambles are no joke; they are profound.
There will be owners of small and medium-sized enterprises that
have bet the house on HS2. People will lose their jobs this side
of the general election as a result of this decision—homes, farms
and businesses all sold, the countryside carved up, and Euston a
hole in the ground, and for what? He has wasted £45 billion on a
line between Old Oak Common and Birmingham that no one asked for
and that has no business case. Only in Conservative-run Britain
could a high-speed train hit the slow-coach lane the second it
hits the north of England.
We need some answers. First, was there a meeting with before the Tory conference in
which a decision on HS2 was taken? If not, why was a video
recorded of the Prime Minister in No.10? Is he suggesting that he
followed in Boris Johnson’s footsteps and recorded two versions
just in case? And what of the economic impact? How many
businesses does the Secretary of State expect to go under as a
result of this decision? What is the estimate of the compensation
that will have to be paid? How much more will phase 1 now cost
through re-scoping? How much do the Government expect to lose in
the coming fire sale of the land, and what safeguards are in
place to ensure that there is not a hint of corruption in those
sales? Given that the west coast main line is at breaking point,
does he accept that this plan will result in severe overcrowding
and set Northern Powerhouse Rail back by a decade?
This level of chaos and economic damage would make even the Prime
Minister’s most recent predecessor blush, and I am not alone in
that opinion. Two former Tory Chancellors have warned that this
is
“an act of huge economic self-harm”.
The Tory Mayor of the west midlands has described it as
“cancelling the future”, and has said that it shows
that
“we can no longer think or act for the long-term as a
country”.
Not content with simply cancelling the programme, the Prime
Minister is now salting the earth by selling off the land—and
what have we got in its place? This so-called Network North. That
announcement can be broken down into three categories: projects
that have already been built, projects that have already been
announced, and projects that do not exist. Let us go through some
of them, shall we? There is the extension of Manchester’s tram
link to the airport, a project that opened nine years ago; there
is the
“brand new rail station for Bradford”,
a project that has been scrapped and reinstated by three Tory
Prime Ministers in a row; and there is the upgrade of the A259 to
Southampton, a route that does not exist. How can the Transport
Secretary stand at that Dispatch Box and pretend that there is
any credible plan for delivery, when last week even the Prime
Minister admitted that these plans were only “illustrative”? For
once I agree with him: they are illustrative—illustrative of the
sheer incompetence of this Government, illustrative of the
contempt with which they treat the north, and illustrative of why
you can never trust the Tories.
The Prime Minister promised us a “revolution” in our transport
infrastructure, but instead we got a wish list. He has robbed
Peter, and he will not even be paying Paul. Communities are sick
and tired of the broken promises from this broken Government.
Does this fiasco not prove once and for all—after 13 failed
years, three discredited rail plans, tens of billions of pounds
of public money wasted. and thousands of homes and lives
upended—that they have no record to stand on, no mandate to
deliver, and no credible plan for the future? Is it not time they
finally accepted that they are a Government at the end of the
line?
Mr Harper
Oh dear. I do not know whether the hon. Lady noticed, but this is
the first day that the House has been back after the conference
break, and I am here at the Dispatch Box making a statement at
the first—[Interruption.] If the hon. Member for Manchester
Central () will allow me to answer the
questions that her hon. Friend has just asked without shouting
from the Opposition Front Bench, I shall be delighted to do so.
This is our first day back, and I have made a statement at the
first opportunity I have had.
The hon. Lady made a point about the cost of living. I drew
attention to the fact that the £2 bus fare cap was being
extended; that will kick in as early as next month, and it is an
important cost of living measure for the many millions of people
who use buses. Buses are the most popular form of public
transport, which is why the Under-Secretary of State for
Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for North West Durham (Mr
Holden), is such a massive champion of them.
The hon. Lady referred to HS2. We are still delivering phase 1
from Euston to the west midlands, which is very significant
transport investment and delivery, in terms of the supply chain
and all the companies that depend on it. Moreover, it delivers a
massive increase in capacity to the west coast main line, taking
the number of seats a day from 134,000 to 250,000. As for the
details in the “Network North” document, let me point out that a
third of the savings we are making that are being reinvested—£12
billion—are increases in funding for various Mayors across the
country. The ultimate decisions about what is to be invested are
for those Mayors, and I have had productive conversations with a
number of them. They will be working with us on the details of
these plans, so that they are right for the areas that they
represent. As for the hon. Lady’s point about decision making, I
have said this publicly before: I took the formal decision on the
day before the Prime Minister’s speech. There was a meeting of
the Cabinet on the morning of his speech, which approved that
decision, and the Prime Minister announced it shortly
afterwards.
I noticed that the right hon. and learned Member for Holborn and
St Pancras () rowed in very quickly, and
has not disavowed this decision. He, of course, has long
campaigned against HS2, and I suspect that the fact he rowed in
so quickly behind it reflects that. I note that, on this
decision, where the Prime Minister leads, the Leader of the
Opposition follows.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the Chair of the Transport Committee.
(Milton Keynes South)
(Con)
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his statement. My
Committee colleagues and I will want to scrutinise a number of
the measures in depth when he appears before us in a few weeks—it
will be a bumper session. Today, however, let me focus on one
issue regarding HS2. One advantage of the project was that it
would release capacity on the west coast main line, not just
between London and Birmingham, but right up the line. As it is
stopping at Handsacre junction, there will be a severe capacity
constraint on that part of the line; there will not be space for
extra inter-regional services and freight services. The
high-speed trains will be in a very congested part of the
network, unless further upgrade work is done. I urge him to look
at that capacity constraint; if HS2 is not happening on that part
of the project, what additional measures might be put in
place?
Mr Harper
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question and, as always,
I look forward to appearing before the Transport Committee to
answer his questions and those of his colleagues, from both sides
of the House. On his specific question, the first thing we have
committed to doing is invest in remodelling Handsacre junction,
so that those high-speed trains that go to Birmingham then get on
to the west coast main line on the fast lines. The most congested
part of the west coast main line is its southern part, which of
course is having a significant capacity upgrade. However, I note
carefully what he said and will bear that in mind. He should also
note that we are investing in the upgraded connections east-west
in the north of England, including from Liverpool to Manchester.
One conversations I have already had was about the importance of
making sure we are able to take freight traffic, including from
the Port of Liverpool, and those are conversations we will take
forward.
(Paisley and Renfrewshire
North) (SNP)
Dear me! I almost feel sorry for the Secretary of State. All the
promises about greener, faster and more sustainable transport and
connectivity are gone, unless you live in Birmingham, where
people will have the most gold-plated express shuttle service in
the history of the world. There are no real benefits to modal
shift or net-zero targets here, but what about levelling up? The
cancellation of the Golborne link last year highlighted that this
Government never really cared about the project serving Scotland,
but the Manchester leg following the Leeds route into the bin
proves that they did not care about the north of England either.
As always with Westminster, for London and the south-east money
is no object, but when a large infrastructure project outside the
M25 runs into trouble, the plug is pulled. of the Scottish Council
for Development and Industry said:
“The lead recommendation in the UK Government’s own Union
Connectivity Review was to reduce journey times and increase rail
capacity between Scotland, London, the Midlands and the North
West of England.”
He also said:
“This is a very short-sighted decision that…actually risks making
Scotland’s connectivity with London worse.”
There was also no need to push back the date on electric
vehicles. The Government could have made the switch easier and
faster had they, at any time whatsoever, listened to us on issues
such as the charging network, VAT equalisation, removing
incentives to switch too early or their zero-emission bus schemes
being entirely unfit for purpose. So will the Secretary of State
guarantee that Scotland will receive the consequentials expected
through HS2, now redirected to these other schemes? How much
money was wasted looking at a Golborne link alternative? How much
consultation took place with the Scottish Government regarding
the A75 announcement, given that it has absolutely nothing to do
with this Government whatever? Will the Department now look at
different rolling stock options, including new high-speed tilting
options, to increase potential speeds on the west coast main
line?
The Secretary of State recently tweeted:
“In Japan, I saw the benefits high speed rail can bring—to
connect communities & grow the economy…we remain fully
committed to building HS2..Building it shows we believe in
Britain”.
I can only conclude therefore that he no longer believes in
Britain—will he confirm that? I like to end in consensus, so I
hope he will answer that question in the affirmative.
Mr Harper
The hon. Gentleman demonstrates in the close of his question the
Scottish National party’s obsession with crowbarring independence
into every question about everything, thus he continued in a way
not to disappoint. The SNP never ceases to talk about
independence at every available opportunity, even when it has
nothing to do with the question.
The hon. Gentleman’s first point, about different regions in the
country, might have some merit if we had just cancelled phase 2
of HS2 and not reinvested every single penny in alternative
transport projects across the country. As I said, some of those
will take place relatively soon: the money for local authorities
for bus funding and for improving the quality of local roads,
which is a top priority for most people, will be available next
spring. The other investment will be available in the same
timeframe as the money would have been delivered for phase 2 of
HS2, which would not have delivered high-speed trains to
Manchester until 2041.
Secondly, I congratulate the hon. Gentleman for mentioning the
zero-emission vehicle mandate that we tabled, which is the single
largest decarbonisation measure that the Government will take. I
notice the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley () barely mentioned it, if at
all, but it is a very significant measure in delivering our net
zero obligations. It is incredibly important and it would be good
to have Opposition support for it. We have the support of the
Scottish and Welsh Governments, which agree with the plan we have
tabled in Parliament today.
On the point the hon. Gentleman made about our planned local
transport spending, Barnett consequentials will flow in the
normal way. The roads Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for
North West Durham (Mr Holden), has spoken to his opposite number
in the Scottish Government about the A75.
As I said, this plan delivers every single penny that would have
been spent on HS2 on alternative transport projects that, I
think, are closer to what people want to see. When the facts
changed, the cost of the project had risen and the benefits had
reduced. That is why we have taken this decision, which will be
welcomed by people across the country.
(Colne Valley) (Con)
As a Yorkshire Member of Parliament, I have always championed
HS2, Northern Powerhouse Rail and the trans-Pennine rail upgrade.
Two out of three is not brilliant, but I will settle for that. It
is very disappointing that the Leader of the Opposition always
campaigned against HS2 as well, but we are where we are. With
Network North, can the Secretary of State confirm that projects
that improve local connectivity, such as the
Huddersfield-Sheffield-Penistone line, which goes through my
constituency and those of my hon. Friends the Members for
Dewsbury () and for Penistone and
Stocksbridge (), are exactly the projects
that can now be delivered, with this cash being invested locally
and regionally?
Mr Harper
My hon. Friend makes two good points, one of which is that the
Leader of the Opposition has always campaigned against HS2.
[Interruption.] If we look at the parliamentary record, he
absolutely has. Secondly, my hon. Friend is right that what we
have been able to do is free up money to pay for other road and
rail projects and, for example, to fund buses. I know that the
rail Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Bexhill and Battle
(), is going to meet my hon. Friend and the colleagues
he mentioned to talk about exactly the sorts of schemes we are
going to deliver.
(Weaver Vale) (Lab)
Is it not the case that rather than levelling up the north, this
is slowing down the north? I will give an illustration. Not very
long ago, a station in the town of Northwich, which I represent,
collapsed. It is now finally being rebuilt, via insurance, and
what is being rebuilt is the ticket office—a ticket office that
this Government are consulting on closing down. That speaks
volumes about how, when the Government cut their cloth, it is
always the north that pays the price.
Mr Harper
I do not think the hon. Gentleman listened to what I said or read
what we said in the document. We are going to reinvest every
single penny that we are saving from cancelling phase 2 of HS2 in
the parts of the country where the money was going to be spent.
Just under £20 billion will be spent in the north of England,
just under £10 billion will be spent in the midlands and £6.5
billion, which we are saving from the new way that we will
deliver Euston station, will be spent in the rest of the country.
That is reinvesting in transport projects that I think are closer
to what people want to see, which is why they have welcomed the
decision we have made.
(Buckingham) (Con)
After I have spent years arguing that HS2 was wasteful and too
destructive and that we could not afford it, the Government have
finally agreed with me and scrapped the line north of Birmingham.
However, with the Government having previously cancelled the
eastern leg and now having chopped its leg off, that leaves a
legless stump through my constituency from London to Birmingham,
which continues to bring daily misery to my constituents and is
costing an amount of money that we cannot afford. I ask the
Secretary of State—going for third time lucky—whether he will
scrap the entirety of HS2, return the land that can be returned,
do something better with the community’s consent with the land
that cannot be returned, and then spend that money on the west
coast main line and the Chiltern line instead.
Mr Harper
Given my hon. Friend’s constituency interest, I completely
understand why he takes the view that he does. He is a doughty
champion for his constituents, and never loses an opportunity—in
this place or, in fact, every time I see him—to make exactly
those points.
However, given the progress we have made, the decision we have
taken is to complete phase 1 from Euston to Birmingham,
delivering that significant capacity upgrade. [Interruption.] I
say to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley, who just cannot
help shouting from a sedentary position, that I had a very
productive meeting with the Euston Partnership last week to
discuss these details. The London Borough of Camden and the Mayor
of London are very enthusiastic, and are working with us in
partnership on those proposals. The new development corporation
at Euston is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to transform that
area. They welcome these proposals, and I look forward to working
with them constructively on them.
Coming back to my hon. Friend’s point, we are going to complete
phase 1 between Euston and Birmingham, which delivers the
significant capacity upgrade that the Chairman of the Select
Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes South
(), referred to. Notwithstanding
the inconvenience being suffered by the constituents of my hon.
Friend the Member for Buckingham (), if there are any issues we
can deal with—other than cancelling phase 1—I am always happy to
meet him.
(Eltham) (Lab)
The Secretary of State did not make any specific reference to his
comments at Conservative party conference about the proposals for
15-minute communities that are out there. He has, however, said
that the number of times drivers can get from A to B will be
their choice, not decided by councils. Does he believe this
nonsense? Can he tell the House about any local authority that
has ever considered such a restriction on local people? This is
just complete nonsense.
Mr Harper
I actually can. If the hon. Gentleman goes to the website of
Oxfordshire County Council, he will see a very specific proposal
for, I think, five roads. That council is proposing to have
filters on those roads and to issue permits, enabling local
residents to only drive down them a specific number of times a
year. That is a Labour-Lib Dem-Green council, or at least it was
when the proposal was made. If a resident exceeds that number of
permitted journeys, a picture will be taken of their licence
plate and they will be issued with a fine. We in the Conservative
party do not support those sorts of restrictions being put on
motorists by local authorities—clearly the hon. Gentleman does,
but we do not, and we will not stand for it.
(Elmet and Rothwell)
(Con)
I am grateful for my right hon. Friend’s statement. Phase 2b to
Leeds was cancelled earlier in the year, so does my right hon.
Friend know when the safeguarded land through my constituency
will be released back? That has had a big impact on constituents
who have seen their lives blighted and have been unable to move
forward. Any news my right hon. Friend has would be gratefully
received; he may want to write to me later so that I can feed it
back to my constituents.
Mr Harper
To help my right hon. Friend, phase 2a safeguarding will be
formally lifted within weeks. Phase 2b safeguarding, which covers
the area in which his constituents live, will be amended by next
summer to allow for any safeguarding we need for the Northern
Powerhouse Rail projects. In the meantime, we will start taking
steps to lift the blighting effect of HS2 in areas where
safeguarding is going to be lifted. We will obviously set out the
details of that in the usual way. There is a proper legal process
to be followed, and we will continue working with local
authorities in my right hon. Friend’s area and colleagues in the
House to keep them fully informed.
(Easington) (Lab)
What consideration has the Secretary of State given to allowing
Parliament to scrutinise the proposed £36 billion of expenditure,
in relation to both Network North and Northern Powerhouse Rail?
In the consideration of the schemes, now that HS2 has been
cancelled, will any of the money that has been saved be available
to address some basic transport failings in constituencies such
as mine? We have a Northern Rail service on the Durham coast line
that is frankly not fit for purpose. There is a lack of capacity.
We have two carriages once an hour, with no notice of cancelled
services, which undermines education and employment, leaving
people stranded on the platform. These failings represent not
only a transport crisis, but an economic crisis, which, frankly,
makes a mockery of the Government’s levelling-up agenda.
Mr Harper
First of all, scrutiny of my Department’s spending will be
carried out by the Transport Committee. The Chair, my hon. Friend
the Member for Milton Keynes South, is no longer in his place,
but I am sure that the Committee, of which the hon. Member for
Easington () is an esteemed member, will
carry out that scrutiny process.
The hon. Gentleman will be aware that in the north-east, there is
a tripling of the money that will be under the control of the new
North East Combined Authority. A significant amount of extra
money in many parts of the country will be controlled by locally
elected Mayors and local authorities, thus ensuring that
transport decisions are taken closer to home. I hope that he and
Opposition Members welcome that as much as I do.
(Tunbridge Wells) (Con)
The Secretary of State will know that in 2025, it is the 200th
anniversary of the world’s first passenger railway in Britain.
Does he share my dismay and, frankly, shame that in this country,
200 years on, we are not able to connect our great cities when
other major countries around the world can do so? Would the right
thing not be to address the cost of the schemes and why they are
so much more expensive in this country, rather than scaling back
our ambitions?
Mr Harper
My right hon. Friend raises two separate points. One is about the
reasons why there have been cost increases. Some of this was in
place before the project was in construction—from planning and
issues like that, which are worth looking at in the long term,
although that will not help in this case. We have also seen
significant cost increases, not least due to construction
inflation over the past few years. However, this is not just
about cost increases; it is also about the benefit reduction. One
of the key parts of the business case for HS2 was that it was for
business and business traffic. We have seen business rail use and
commuter rail use halve post-pandemic because of the changed way
in which people choose to travel. That has been an essential part
of the decision, and that is why we have decided to change the
way we spend the money—not to not spend it, but to spend it on
transport investments closer to the way people live their lives.
We think that is the right decision, notwithstanding the fact
that I recognise that my right hon. Friend is disappointed by
it.
(Slough) (Lab)
The Government claimed that the decision to scrap most of HS2 was
made due to rising costs, yet who was Chief Secretary to the
Treasury and then Chancellor when the costs were spiralling out
of control? The current Prime Minister. Not content with that
failure, we now know that he also wasted a shocking £2.2 billion
on the leg of HS2 that has just been cancelled. Secretary of
State, does this entire fiasco not illustrate how little regard
the Government have for taxpayers’ money?
Mr Harper
No, not at all. Having no regard for taxpayers’ money would be
deciding that a project was going to cost too much and deliver
too little in benefits, and then continuing to spend taxpayers’
money regardless. This will not be welcomed by everybody and it
was not the consensus view, but we have decided to cancel the
second phase. By the way, this was about not just increased
costs, but the combination of increased costs and reduced
benefits, as I said in answer to my right hon. Friend the Member
for Tunbridge Wells (). It was about the two things
together, and we have decided to reinvest the money in
alternative transport projects, which, by the way, have a higher
return on investment and will therefore deliver a greater return
to taxpayers. That shows exactly the opposite of what the hon.
Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi) said—that we value taxpayers’ money
and want to deliver the best return for taxpayers’ money, which
is why we have made this change in how we are investing their
hard-earned money.
(Wokingham) (Con)
Many councils apply for grants in order to make changes to their
local roads. When considering these applications, will Ministers
ensure that they do not end up paying for schemes that cut local
capacity on crucial roads and make drivers’ lives a misery?
Mr Harper
My right hon. Friend makes a very good point about what we should
prioritise when funding roads. He should know that one of the
important changes I have made is to make sure that our active
travel team is focused on delivering cycling and walking schemes
that increase choice, rather than focusing on driving people out
of their cars. I hope he will welcome that important change.
(Bath) (LD)
The Secretary of State says that his party is not anti-motorist,
but it is clearly anti-public transport. We Liberal Democrats are
not anti-motorist either, but we are unequivocally pro-public
transport. Rail produces 76% less carbon dioxide emissions than
the equivalent road journey, and each freight train removes up to
76 lorries from our roads. The decision to scrap the northern leg
of HS2 will lead to up to half a million more lorry journeys up
and down the country, resulting in a lot more congestion in our
towns and cities. Is the Secretary of State not concerned that
freight that would have gone on to the railway will now be forced
on to the roads, increasing our carbon emissions and
congestion?
Mr Harper
I do not agree with the hon. Lady’s characterisation of our view
on public transport. First, we have already put in a significant
amount of extra money this year and, from the savings, still more
is going into our bus system. Our £2 bus fare cap is making it
much easier and cheaper for people to use public transport. Twice
as many journeys are made by bus than by rail. She should also
know that HS2 spending was crowding out other important
investments. One of the things we are now able to fund is the
£600 million project at Ely junction that will increase capacity
for both passengers and freight to the important port of
Felixstowe.
(Witham) (Con)
My right hon. Friend has just mentioned Ely junction, and he will
know that the great eastern main line taskforce has assiduously
campaigned for that investment for over a decade. I am grateful
for this announcement, and we look forward to seeing the proposal
go forward. Alongside rail, which is huge in the east of England,
can my right hon. Friend bring his long-term plan for motorists
to Essex by bringing forward the dualling of the A120? That
scheme has been delayed for another two years because of
construction inflation, which I completely understand. I implore
him to look at the business case and see what the scheme would
mean for the economic wellbeing of mid-Essex.
Mr Harper
The Ely junction scheme, which I know my right hon. Friend and
others welcome, is a well worked through scheme that was on
Network Rail’s list of important priorities, but we simply did
not have the money to fund it. We now do, as a result of this
project. People cannot want to continue building the second phase
of HS2 and simultaneously want to do all these other things. A
choice had to be made, and we made that choice, and I think it is
the right choice for the country. I know how important my right
hon. Friend thinks her road scheme is. I obviously cannot deal
with it now but, as ever, I would be happy to meet her to discuss
how important it is for her constituents.
(Ellesmere Port and Neston)
(Lab)
I saw the Secretary of State’s Network North map on Twitter,
featuring those legendary northern towns of Tavistock, Dawlish
and Plymouth. That might have been mildly amusing had my
constituency not been cut in half, with the whole of the Wirral
disappearing into the Irish sea. Have we been taken off the map
because we have no funding for any capital transport projects?
Will Cheshire West and Chester Council now get a refund for the
hundreds of thousands of pounds that it has already spent on
preparatory work for HS2 coming to Cheshire? That money now
appears to have been wasted because of the bungled handling of
this contract.
Mr Harper
Just to be clear, of the money that we are saving as a result of
cancelling the second phase of HS2, just under £20 billion is
being spent in the north and just under £10 billion is being
spent in the midlands. The money being spent in the rest of the
country is the money saved from the way we are now going to
deliver Euston station—with a much more ambitious development,
building thousands more houses and having a much more positive
impact on the local economy. It is sensible to call it Network
North, because that is where two thirds of the money is going,
but the £6.5 billion that is being spent in the rest of the
country, outside the north and the midlands, will be very
welcome. As I have said, every penny is being reinvested in those
parts of the country that HS2 was going to benefit. In the north
of England, for example, we are looking at investing £12 billion
in the line between Liverpool and Manchester, and at having
productive talks with the Mayors in that part of the world to
deliver transport projects that are their priorities for the
people they represent.
(Sedgefield) (Con)
The allocation of funding to the north-east has the potential to
have a major positive local impact. I particularly welcome the
announcement on Ferryhill station and look forward to discussing
the timing with the Secretary of State. However, the substantial
funding towards investments such as the Leamside line was within
24 hours spun by the local opposition as a reversal of intent.
Will he make absolutely clear what is being delivered to the
north-east and how it affects the Leamside project?
Mr Harper
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. The
reopening of the Leamside line is a Transport North East-led
project. It is developing a business case to connect Washington
with the Tyne and Wear metro, and we are supporting it as it
develops the outline business case. Because we have cancelled the
second phase of HS2, £685 million extra is being allocated to the
north-east, meaning that the new north-east Mayor will have £1.8
billion to spend on their transport funding over the five years
from 2027. One such scheme could be the reopening of the Leamside
line. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley
() says, “Could be”. We believe
in devolution. We are giving £1.8 billion to the north-east Mayor
and it will be for the Mayor to decide the priorities. I know,
having talked to one of the candidates for that mayoral office,
that this is a priority for them. My hon. Friend the Member for
Sedgefield () has been championing this
project enormously, and we can now fund such projects because of
the cancellation of the second phase of HS2. I am grateful to my
hon. Friend and will continue to work with him as he champions
that case.
(Kingston upon Hull North)
(Lab)
On Wednesday, Hull and Humber chamber of commerce, Humber local
authority leaders and MPs are going to meet the rail Minister to
discuss the need for transport investment around the Humber. The
Prime Minister announced at the Conservative party conference
that rail electrification for Hull would go ahead, and the
Secretary of State has also mentioned that in his remarks today.
Of course, this has been blocked twice by Conservative
Governments. In the light of that and the broken promises over
HS2, trust is very limited in the north as to whether this
Government will deliver on what they say. To help with that, will
the Secretary of State tell me the start date for the rail
electrification project to Hull?
Mr Harper
I am not going to pluck dates out of the air. It is worth saying
that phase 2 of HS2 was not going to deliver trains to Manchester
until 2041. This funding is over a significant period of time.
Clearly, we have to have the normal processes in place where we
work through business cases and do all of that. I am not going to
pluck dates out of the air. Since we made the announcement, I
have met both National Highways and Network Rail. They are now
working through the detail of how these proposals fit in with
their planning processes. We will announce the details in due
course, but the right hon. Lady would not expect me to pluck
dates out of the air. We will announce them in the normal way. I
know that my hon. Friend the rail Minister is meeting her local
authority to talk through the details of these important
schemes.
(Stoke-on-Trent South)
(Con)
I very much support this decision on HS2, given that the cost was
totally out of control, the benefits were much diminished from
what was originally promised, and many of the stations in
Staffordshire and up and down the north will actually receive a
better service via the Handsacre link than ever could have been
delivered by phase 2. Does my right hon. Friend agree that people
in Stoke-on-Trent in Staffordshire very much want to see
investment going into local schemes such as reopening Meir
station, reopening the Stoke to Leek line, investing in the A5
and the A50, and investing in junction 15 of the M6?
Mr Harper
I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who has demonstrated through his
question and that list of valued local schemes why investing the
money in those schemes will deliver more benefits to more people
more quickly than delivering the rest of HS2. That is why he and
many other people have warmly welcomed this decision.
(Carmarthen East and
Dinefwr) (Ind)
Despite chopping HS2 off at the knees coming at a considerable
cost—about £40 billion, from what I understand—and the statement
indicating that the Government will reinvest the money from HS2’s
northern leg, which is another £36 billion, the only Welsh
announcement I can see in the statement is about the north Wales
main line, which the Government estimate to have a cost of about
£1 billion. That, by my maths, leaves a shortfall of about £3
billion. Will the British Government ensure in discussions with
the Welsh Government that Wales gets its allocated shortfall of
£3 billion so that it can invest in Welsh transport
priorities?
Mr Harper
The Government retain responsibility for delivering heavy rail.
We are making an investment of £1 billion into electrifying the
north Wales main line, which I would have thought the hon. Member
would welcome. As over the coming years we develop the funding
for local transport spending, Wales will get Barnett
consequentials in the usual way.
(Blackley and Broughton)
(Lab)
There is a deep democratic point in all of this. The Secretary of
State was elected at the last general election with the
expectation given by the then leader of the Conservative party
that HS2 would be built. Partly because of the Government’s
financial incompetence, they are now cancelling it. A Prime
Minister—not the Secretary of State—whose own party did not
support him, and who has certainly never put himself before the
electorate as Prime Minister, is cancelling it. The current
Secretary of State is following a scorched earth policy whereby
it will be impossible for either the elected Mayors who are
looking for alternative funding for carrying on the second phase
or an incoming Labour Government, to build out the full scheme,
with all the benefits it would have. That is fundamentally
anti-democratic. Will the Secretary of State not consider, on a
democratic basis, protecting the line of HS2?
Mr Harper
The hon. Gentleman raised two points. On the first, I make no
apology for basing a decision on the facts. The facts have
changed—both the costs have increased and the benefits have
reduced—and pouring taxpayers’ money into a scheme where that had
happened would not make a lot of sense. On his second point, I am
now thoroughly confused: I thought the Labour Party had now
accepted that HS2 was not going to happen and that it preferred
all the alternative things we wanted to spend the money on. It
cannot have it both ways. If he and his colleagues want to
complete the second phase of HS2, they must go and tell everybody
else that they do not want to spend the money on all those other
things that we are going to spend it on. We have to make choices
in politics. We have made our choice. I am happy with our choice
and will defend it. They cannot have it both ways.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
Apologies—I inadvertently called two speakers from the Opposition
side, so I will next take two from the Government side. While I
am on my feet, I remind Members that we have another big
statement and an important debate to come, so I urge brevity in
questions and answers.
(South Ribble)
(Con)
When the Secretary of State is looking at Network North, which I
do welcome—I thank him very much for the A582 benefit in the
Ribble Valley constituency of Mr Deputy Speaker; he will be
delighted with that name-check—may I encourage him to think about
the structure for funding other opportunities? There is a gap in
the market between very large rail schemes and those extremely
small rail schemes that are too small for local councils to
deliver, such as at Midge Hall in my constituency, where the
trains stop at a platform and we have the nonsense of customers
not being able to get on or off. Does he agree that we could look
at such improvement schemes in Network North?
Mr Harper
The rail Minister has listened to my hon. Friend very carefully,
and I will ensure that he meets her to discuss that specific
proposal.
(Newcastle-under-Lyme)
(Con)
The cancellation of HS2 is a triple win for Newcastle-under-Lyme.
First, we will get faster trains to London. Secondly, we will get
improvements to junction 50 and the things that my hon. Friend
the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South () talked about. Thirdly and
most importantly, HS2 will not cut a swathe through the south of
Newcastle-under-Lyme. On that point, the people who will be most
pleased are my councillors Gary and Simon White, who have been
representing the people of Betley and Madeley on this since long
before I was an MP. I have a number of questions from them that I
will send to the Secretary of State, but most of all they are
focused on the need to ensure that the situation faced by
landowners who have had their land subject to compulsory purchase
can be put right as quickly as possible, whether they want to
purchase the land or not. What reassurance can he give that we
will look after landowners whose land has been subject to
compulsory purchase?
Mr Harper
As I just said, we are now following a proper legal process. We
will set out the details of that, and then landowners who have
been impacted will know what they can do for us to try to put
things right. I welcome the work that his two councillors have
done in ably representing their constituents, as my hon. Friend
represents his.
(East Antrim) (DUP)
The more the Government pursue their net zero obsession, the less
Conservative they look. The Minister, without any embarrassment,
has today announced—in fact, he has boasted of—a new law, the
zero emission vehicle mandate, which will instruct manufacturers
on what they are allowed to produce year on year. Then he tells
us that consumers will be allowed to purchase whatever cars they
want until 2035. That sounds more like a Stalinist economic plan
than a free-market Conservative policy. Can he tell us what will
happen if rational consumers decide that they do not want to buy
more expensive cars—cars that take half an hour to refuel, are
likely to burst into flames, or are more expensive to insure?
What will he do then? Will he have to introduce legislation to
instruct dealers on what cars they sell and how to sell them?
Mr Harper
First, if the right hon. Gentleman assumes that climate change is
a problem, then we need to deal with it. Transport is the biggest
single emitter of carbon. That is why we have published these
ambitious proposals, which by the way are supported by the
automotive industry. Several of those in the industry are
planning on going faster than we are legislating for. On the
specific point for Northern Ireland, the plans that we have set
out are agreed by the Scottish, Welsh and UK Governments. When,
as I hope, we get a Northern Ireland Government and Assembly back
up and running, they will have to decide whether they wish to
join in with those proposals. I very much hope that they do.
(Don Valley) (Con)
I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement and the additional
£900 million for South Yorkshire, which will make a huge
difference to the region. However, with the recent closure of
Doncaster Sheffield airport, does he agree that the best thing
that our combined authority Mayor can do is use all his devolved
powers to work with all stakeholders to secure the opening of our
airport, and will the Secretary of State use all his influence to
press the South Yorkshire Mayor to do the right thing with the
additional money and use it to help secure our airport’s
future?
Mr Harper
I know that my hon. Friend and others in that area of the country
have campaigned in favour of the airport. Of course, the thing
about devolution is that Mayors are able to decide to use their
resources, which they now have more of, on what they think are
their local priorities, representing the people they are elected
to serve. It is a decision for the Mayor, and of course my hon.
Friend and others will campaign for that decision to be
taken.
(Barnsley Central) (Lab)
The hon. Member for Don Valley () said that South Yorkshire
will get £900 million as a consequence of the decision made by
the Secretary of State and the Government to cancel HS2. Will the
Secretary of State confirm that it is the case that in South
Yorkshire we can expect £900 million for our region that we would
not otherwise have received? If that is the case, over what
timeframe will we receive it?
Mr Harper
It is extra money going to the region, capital funding over the
next phase of that capital budget. It is over the second phase of
the city region sustainable transport settlements scheme. I have
already had a discussion with the South Yorkshire Mayor to talk
it through, and his officials and mine are working through the
details so that he can look at the relevant schemes that he
wishes to invest in over that period.
(Broadland) (Con)
Norfolk’s infrastructure needs have often been overlooked, but
not any more: just in the last week, the Department of Transport
has announced £231 million supporting the Norwich Western Link
road in my constituency, for which I am very grateful, in
addition to the £600 million supporting the Ely junction upgrade.
The Secretary of State has mentioned the increase in freight
transport that that allows, but am I right in thinking that it
also unlocks the possibility of increased passenger trains
between Norwich and Cambridge, along the Norwich tech
corridor?
Mr Harper
I am pleased that we were able to make the decision on the road
that my hon. Friend and other colleagues have been campaigning
strongly for, and to communicate that to his county council so
that the scheme can continue apace. I am grateful for his welcome
for the upgrade for Ely junction and, as I said in my earlier
remarks, that unlocks both freight capacity and potentially
further passenger services that can be delivered. Network Rail
will set out further details on that in due course, once it has
set out the timetable, now that I have been able to confirm that
the plan is funded.
(Chesham and Amersham) (LD)
Earlier this year I asked the rail Minister, the hon. Member for
Bexhill and Battle (), what was in place to ensure effective monitoring
and oversight of HS2. He assured me that comprehensive monitoring
arrangements were in place. Now even the Prime Minister has
raised concerns about mismanagement of HS2. What assurances can
the Secretary of State give to my constituents in the Chilterns
that HS2 Limited and its contractors will be better held to
account?
Mr Harper
On that specific point, one of the things we have done, because
we are going to continue delivering phase 1 of HS2 from London
Euston to Birmingham, is to make sure that we focus on both cost
and delivery on the current timetable. There are now extra
members appointed to the HS2 board; I have met the board to talk
through its plan and to hold it to account on both the delivery
schedule and the cost budget that it has to hit, and I will
continue to do so. If the hon. Lady has any further issues, I
know that my hon. Friend the rail Minister will be delighted to
meet her to talk through them.
(Aberconwy) (Con)
I can tell the Secretary of State that residents and businesses
in Aberconwy and across north Wales are delighted to hear that
there will be £1 billion put towards the electrification of the
north Wales main line. The last major infrastructure project we
had along the north Wales coast was in 1987 for the Conwy tunnel.
Like that tunnel, this project will be transformative for our
local economies, for lives and for our connections with the
north-west of England and down to London. Will my right hon.
Friend confirm from the Dispatch Box, for residents and
businesses in north Wales, that £1 billion will be attributed to
the electrification of the north Wales main line, and will he
meet me and my colleagues to confirm that those plans are
progressing?
Mr Harper
I would be pleased to meet my hon. Friend and colleagues, and I
can confirm the money that we have put aside. I have already
discussed the plans with Network Rail, which is starting work on
detailing those plans. I am happy to meet him to talk them
through in more detail.
(Washington and Sunderland
West) (Lab)
I have campaigned for more than 18 years for the reopening of the
Leamside line, which would enable the metro to come to Washington
in my constituency —14 years longer than the hon. Member for
Sedgefield (), who is a newcomer to that
campaign. So hon. Members can imagine my joy when I saw it in
print, the day after the Prime Minister’s speech—only for it to
disappear 24 hours later. Far from it being the Opposition who
went out spinning, it was Ministers on the Prime Minister’s own
Front Bench who were on the airwaves spinning that nothing had
changed after it disappeared. If it was just illustrative, why
did it need to be deleted from the Network North document with
other such illustrations?
Mr Harper
It was not deleted from the Network North document. The Network
North document that was published on the website has not changed,
so— [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley () keeps going on about
illustrative stuff. As I have said, £12 billion of the £36
billion was allocated to combined authority Mayors, so what it
gets spent on is ultimately their decision. I know that that is a
priority for the north-east, so it is one of the things on which
we are working with them on a business case.
I am very pleased that the hon. Member for Washington and
Sunderland West (Mrs Hodgson) and my hon. Friend the Member for
Sedgefield () are both campaigning—it is
always good when these things are done on a cross-party basis. I
know that this is a priority for a region. The money is now there
to pay for it, which was not the case before we took the decision
to cancel the second phase of HS2. These things are only now able
to happen because we took that decision. If the Opposition decide
that they want to campaign to build the second phase of HS2,
things such as the Leamside line will not happen.
(Cleethorpes) (Con)
If the seaside resorts, industrial towns and rural villages of
Lincolnshire are to expand their economies, it is essential that
the road network be improved. The A15, A16 and A46 are just three
examples. Can my right hon. Friend assure me that some of the
redirected £36 billion will head towards Lincolnshire, and will
he arrange for me and neighbouring colleagues to meet the
Minister with responsibility for roads to discuss future
plans?
Mr Harper
I would be very pleased for the Under-Secretary of State for
Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for North West Durham (Mr
Holden), to meet my hon. Friend and colleagues. Yes, there is
money going to all local authorities to address the quality of
their local roads. A number of road schemes, including the major
road network and large local majors programmes, were funded in
partnership between the Department and local authorities, but we
are now able to pay all the costs to bring them to fruition more
quickly. On specific local schemes, I know that my hon. Friend
the Under-Secretary of State would be delighted to meet my hon.
Friend and local colleagues to talk them through that in more
detail.
(Manchester, Withington)
(Lab)
Building HS2 was a long-term decision for the future—investment
for decades to come—not just to improve transport but to drive
the economy of the north, which is why my south Manchester
constituents once again feel let down by this Government. We now
have the worst possible outcomes: £45 billion spent on half a
job, without those long-term benefits for the north. That is not
a long-term decision but a short-term, short-sighted failure.
Mr Harper
I disagree with the hon. Gentleman. First, the high-speed trains
were not going to get to Manchester until 2041 anyway. Secondly,
as the facts have changed, it has become clear that we will
receive better returns on taxpayers’ hard-earned money by
cancelling the second phase of HS2 and reinvesting every penny in
alternative rail projects in the north, the midlands and
elsewhere. We have set out the detail of that plan. I know that
not everybody will agree with it—that is okay—but those who do
not like what we have proposed instead have to be honest with
people and say that campaigning to build the second phase of HS2
will mean that those other things cannot be done. The choice had
to be made. We have made the right choice, which is to invest
that money in things that will give a better return, sooner and
for more people in more parts of the country. That is the right
choice for the country, and a long-term decision for a better
future.
(Scunthorpe) (Con)
I am a member of the High Speed Rail (Crewe - Manchester) Bill
Select Committee. We have been sitting for nine months and have
listened carefully to a lot of petitioners. My view is that HS2
has had a massive impact on many of those people’s lives. How can
the Secretary of State ensure that the people who have already
lost businesses and properties to make way for a railway line
that will not be built have the option to get them back for a
fair price?
Mr Harper
One thing that we will do, as we work through the consequences of
the decision, is set out the details exactly. I will not do so
now because there are important legal consequences for such
things, but we will set out the details exactly for people whose
properties were subject to compulsory purchase orders—my hon.
Friend will know, there are rules detailing what happens when
such properties are no longer needed for the purpose for which
they were purchased—to protect the constituents who were
affected. We will set out details of how that will work in due
course, and will keep her informed.
(Arfon) (PC)
I was very pleased when the Prime Minister announced the
electrification of the north Wales line, having been a long-term
advocate of that sort of project. In fact, as long ago as 2003, I
met the chair and chief executive of the then Strategic Rail
Authority to press for it—he said no. Twenty years later, I
remember the SRA’s motto, which was “Britain’s railway, properly
delivered”. I was concerned that the Prime Minister noted a
figure of £1 billion for the north Wales project; many
commentators think that that is quite insufficient. Can the
Secretary of State guarantee that the project will be properly
delivered by being properly and fully funded?
Mr Harper
I am grateful for what I think was a welcome for the north Wales
mainline electrification. I met Network Rail following the
announcement we made, and it will now do the detailed work on
delivering that scheme. It will announce the details, the
timeframe and so forth in the usual way, and I look forward to
the hon. Gentleman’s support for each stage of the project.
(Ipswich) (Con)
I very much welcome the commitment to Ely North junction and also
to Haughley junction. They will deliver major benefits for my
constituents, including an hourly Peterborough to Ipswich service
and better services to London. It will also benefit the midlands
and the north by better connecting the busiest sea container port
in Europe to the rail network. Haughley junction is a much
cheaper and simpler project than Ely North junction. Is there
scope to expedite and accelerate the delivery of that specific
project, which will start delivering benefits on the ground for
my constituents soon?
Mr Harper
I am grateful for the campaigning work my hon. Friend has done on
pushing for that scheme. It was very clear from the work that he
and other colleagues have done that it was a very important
priority. I can confirm that the Ely area capacity enhancement
project includes Haughley junction, and we have started the work
with Network Rail. It is seized of trying to do it as quickly as
we can, but we obviously have to make sure it is done properly. I
will keep him posted in the usual way.
(City of Durham) (Lab)
No matter how much the Secretary of State tries to back-pedal,
the fact is that the proposal to reopen the Leamside line was
scrapped just 24 hours after it was announced, and businesses and
communities in the north-east rightly feel betrayed. Who was it
who decided that they would water down the proposal? Who decided
that the Leamside line was far too north to be worthy of
Government investment? Was it the Prime Minister, the Treasury or
the Minister who sold out the north-east?
Mr Harper
I am not quite sure why the hon. Lady does not think that an
extra £685 million for transport in the north-east, adding up to
£1.8 billion of investment, and the fact that we have started
work with officials in that area on that project should not be
welcomed. I think it should be welcomed, and I am sure that she
and other colleagues who support it will continue working with us
on making sure that it gets delivered.
(Blackpool South) (Ind)
The Secretary of State will be aware that Blackpool Council is
considering spending millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on 90
zero-emission buses from China, instead of purchasing British
ones. It is beyond farcical that taxpayer cash intended to
support British jobs and local supply chains may be used to
import poorer quality vehicles and ultimately end up in the hands
of the Chinese Government. Will my right hon. Friend join me in
urging Blackpool Council to support British jobs and investment,
and to think again?
Mr Harper
It is ultimately for local authorities to make decisions. They
are accountable, and it is for them to make decisions about how
they choose to spend the taxpayers’ money for which they are
responsible. I have heard very clearly what my hon. Friend has
said about where that money should be spent, and his local
authority will have done so. More importantly, however, so will
have his voters, and they will be able to make a decision about
the council’s future in due course.
(City of Chester) (Lab)
A number of years ago, the Conservative Government expressly
instructed Members, local councils and other stakeholders not to
focus on the electrification of the north Wales line. As a
result, virtually the entire rail development case for Cheshire,
north-east Wales and the Wirral was built on the premise of HS2.
Have I heard the Secretary of State correctly that we are going
to waste all the time, effort and money spent over the years, and
go right back to the drawing board? To paraphrase the hon. Member
for Milton Keynes South (), what exactly is the
plan?
Mr Harper
I am not entirely certain exactly what the hon. Lady’s question
was, but we have set out the plan very carefully. We are going to
deliver the first phase of HS2 from Euston to Birmingham, we are
going to cancel the second phase and we are going to reinvest
every single penny—the £36 billion we have saved—in the north,
the midlands and the rest of the country. That is a very clear
plan, and I think it is one that will be welcomed by the
public.
(North West Leicestershire)
(Reclaim)
Will the Secretary of State confirm that, as per the Prime
Minister’s recent announcement, the Ivanhoe line will be fully
reopened, thereby linking Burton upon Trent to Leicester? Is the
Secretary of State aware that even this week compulsory purchase
orders are being issued and processed in respect of property and
land on the now-cancelled HS2 route north of Birmingham?
Mr Harper
On the second point, which is very important for the hon.
Gentleman’s constituents, all outstanding claims for land that
has already been acquired for phase 2 of HS2 will still be paid.
Applications that are in progress will be handled on a
case-by-case basis after consultation with the claimants, because
people may well have made plans based on the land being purchased
and it is important that we follow through on that, so there will
be proper consultation with claimants before we make decisions to
try to do the right thing by the people affected. The Ivanhoe
line is going to be delivered.
(Tiverton and Honiton)
(LD)
I welcome sincerely the news of the Secretary of State’s support
for Cullompton railway station. It is not new, given that my
predecessor as MP for Tiverton and Honiton, , secured restoring your railway
funding for Cullompton station two years ago. At that time, Neil
said that
“construction could take place as early as 2024”;
will the Secretary of State tell my constituents whether
Cullompton station is still on track to open in this
Parliament?
Mr Harper
It is very important, when projects are promised, that we have
the funds to pay for them, and it is by cancelling the second
phase of HS2 that we are able to fund that important project,
which I am glad the hon. Gentleman welcomes. I do not think that
the rail Minister and I, in the time we have been in post, have
had any communication from the hon. Gentleman campaigning for the
station, whereas my hon. Friend the Member for East Devon () has campaigned for it
assiduously, as has my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton Deane
().
|
