Asked by
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have in respect
of land already purchased for HS2 north of Birmingham.
The Minister of State, Department for Transport ( of Richmond Hill) (Lab)
My Lords, the Government are thoroughly reviewing the position
they have inherited before setting out more detailed plans in due
course. This includes our position on HS2 phase 2 safeguarding
and on the land that was previously acquired for HS2's cancelled
phases. Any land acquired for phase 2 that is no longer required
will be sold in line with Treasury rules through a disposal
programme.
(Lab)
My Lords, as my noble friend the Minister knows, when cancelled the northern leg of
HS2, he did so in the full knowledge that substantial sums of
money had already been spent. Can my noble friend tell me his
estimate of precisely how much had been spent before the
cancellation? Further, so that money is not entirely wasted, can
he give the House a clear assurance, which I am not sure he gave
in his Answer, that the Government will at least protect the
route of the line to Manchester, including retaining land that
has already been purchased? I am sure he would agree that, in so
doing, he will make it much easier for any future Government—this
one, I hope—to complete the project, which should never have been
cancelled in the first place.
of Richmond Hill (Lab)
I thank my noble friend for his supplementary question. As
reported by the National Audit Office, by March 2024 £2.3 billion
had been spent on phase 2 which, as he says, was cancelled by the
previous Government. No property on the hastily cancelled phase
2a has yet been disposed of. The Government are carefully
considering what to do. He will know as I do that railway
infrastructure lasts 150 or more years, so the right thing is to
have a considered long-term plan for the benefit of the economic
growth, jobs and housing in this country.
(Con)
My Lords, nobody knows better than the Minister the importance of
capacity as far as that rail line is concerned—particularly the
capacity from Handsacre to Crewe, the legislation for which has
already gone through this House. Is there a time limit on that
legislation, as there sometimes is on planning permissions, or
does that legislation stand good for a Government who wish to
concern themselves seriously with a capacity that is so vital on
our railways, if we are to shift freight from road to rail?
of Richmond Hill (Lab)
I thank the noble Lord for his question, and I recognise, as he
does, the capacity limitations of the west coast main line north
of Handsacre. There is a time limit; I cannot offhand say what it
is, but I can certainly write to the noble Lord. The Government
intend to work out what to do and to say what they will do before
any expiry of those powers.
(CB)
Can the Minister tell the House whether land acquired in this
way, where it is to be disposed of, will be offered back to its
original owners? Can he comment on interviews that I have heard,
where people have been offered the opportunity to buy back the
land but at prices considerably higher than they were given when
the land was compulsorily acquired from them?
of Richmond Hill (Lab)
My Lords, I know there is a process to be followed. I will have
to write to the noble Lord to explain that process in detail and
on the allegation that people have been asked to pay more for
their land when it has been offered back than they were offered
in the first place. I will do so.
(Con)
My Lords, the Minister will know that since the cancellation of
HS2, the mayors of Greater Manchester and the West Midlands have
collaborated in commissioning and producing a report for the
construction on a similar alignment of what is referred to as the
“Midlands-North West Rail Link” at considerably lower cost than
HS2 would be. Can the Minister give the House an absolute
assurance that no land will be sold that would be necessary for
the construction of that proposed rail link until the Government
have had the time to assess it and give it full
consideration?
of Richmond Hill (Lab)
I am aware of the report that the noble Lord refers to. It is an
interesting report. We recognise the concerns about connectivity
between Birmingham, Manchester and the north of England. We will
consider advice and engage with the mayors and the detail of the
report and give ourselves time to do that before any precipitate
action is taken on the land concerned.
(LD)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that building a modern railway
should surely include level boarding, in order to make disability
access available to everyone? Does he therefore share my concern
that many of the stations planned on HS2 were not to have level
boarding? In particular, can he reassure us that the Government's
review will look at level boarding access at Old Oak Common
station, which will be a major point on the route?
of Richmond Hill (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for her question. I am as aware as she
is that level boarding is a really important consideration for
many people, including those with disabilities. However, even in
respect of HS2, it is a complicated subject because there are
relatively few HS2 stations and, as it is now configured, those
trains will serve many stations on the conventional railway
network, at which platforms have been at differing heights for as
long as they have been built, in some cases going back to the
1840s. However, the point she raises is really important; the
point she raises about Old Oak Common is important, and the point
about Old Oak Common is equally complicated, because Old Oak
Common will not merely serve the new HS2 trains in their new
station—at which level boarding will be relatively simple—but
will also serve trains on the conventional railway network on
both main and relief lines out of Paddington, which have
themselves several different floor heights. We need to crack this
problem, and I am very sympathetic to the point raised by the
noble Baroness, but it is more complicated than it might sound. I
will give her the assurance that she wants that we are actively
considering it, because building new railway stations is very
expensive and takes a long time and we should try to get it
right.
(Con)
My Lords, on 31 January 2017 I put an amendment down in this
House to the HS2 Bill which, if passed, would have stopped it
there and then and saved us all an awful lot of trouble. Some 25
of your Lordships understood and supported me; unfortunately, the
Bill that went through resulted in the chaos that we have known,
confirming that the project was never a good idea. It is hugely
expensive at the expense of the NHS among other things—
Noble Lords
Question!
(Con)
This issue warrants quite a little bit of talking; it is the
biggest one and everybody in the country thinks it is nonsense.
Here is my question for the Minister: can he please do his best
with an impossible task, keep us fully updated and make sure that
everybody who has been affected by this travesty gets the fairest
possible treatment?
of Richmond Hill (Lab)
Yes.
of Llanfaes (PC)
My Lords, will the Minister confirm that the Government will
correct a long-standing injustice that this has starved the Welsh
public purse for far too long? Does he acknowledge that HS2 is an
England-only project, and will His Majesty's Government ensure
that Wales receives the £4 billion of consequentials owed to the
Welsh Government, as Welsh Government Ministers and the Secretary
of State for Wales support?
of Richmond Hill (Lab)
I doubt the noble Baroness's allegation about support. It is a
serious issue, but it is about the allocation of funding. I have
answered these questions before, and the position remains the
same.
