Saqib Bhatti (Meriden) (Con) This House has heard much about HS2
this week, so I can reassure the Minister that my intent is not to
repeat what has already been said. Instead, I want to focus on
HS2’s community engagement—or, I am sorry to say, its lack of
meaningful engagement. I deliver this debate based on my
interactions with HS2, and my reflections on dealing with it over
the past three years. As the Minister will be aware, my
constituency of Meriden reflects every...Request free trial
(Meriden) (Con)
This House has heard much about HS2 this week, so I can reassure
the Minister that my intent is not to repeat what has already
been said. Instead, I want to focus on HS2’s community
engagement—or, I am sorry to say, its lack of meaningful
engagement. I deliver this debate based on my interactions with
HS2, and my reflections on dealing with it over the past three
years. As the Minister will be aware, my constituency of Meriden
reflects every aspect of the HS2 debate. On the one hand, it has
the interchange station and the related Arden Cross development,
making my constituency one of the best-connected parts of the
country and the world. HS2 is forecast to create tens of
thousands of jobs and thousands of homes.
On the other hand, HS2 Ltd is ripping up villages in my
constituency such as Balsall Common and Hampton in Arden,
blighting areas of outstanding natural beauty and damaging the
green belt. Those villages are more than just their beautiful
environments: they are proud, close-knit communities that care
about their surroundings and about the legacy that will be left
for future generations, and I am privileged to represent each and
every one of my constituents who live there. It is those
communities that I am standing up for today, and it is those
communities that I believe HS2 Ltd wilfully ignores and, in many
cases, treats with contempt. Just to be clear, I am sure that if
HS2 Ltd were asked, “Have you engaged with the local community?”,
it would list a lot of things that it has done. However, the
community—the people who we serve—will say, “They come to you;
they speak at you; they tell you they have listened and that they
will act; and then they continue as they were, and communities
are left bewildered and we are left to go through the cycle over
and over again.”
I want to highlight three examples of the interactions that I
believe exemplify how HS2 Ltd is not living up to its
responsibilities, and is failing to be—in the words of its own
policy—“good neighbours”. The first is the haulage route going
through my village of Balsall Common, which was meant to be a
temporary route to help facilitate the movement of materials.
Since 2016, long before I was even elected, the residents of
Balsall Common had been providing manageable, achievable
alternatives that would have mitigated all the disruption and
allowed the project to go forward on time. It was the first major
HS2-related issue that was brought to me when I was elected, and
despite numerous interactions, HS2 Ltd remained adamant that its
way was the only way. Constituents complained to me that the
briefings would happen and action points would be taken away,
only for HS2 to return and present the same PowerPoint time after
time. Nothing would change. I was also on the receiving end of
this; time after time, I was given the same briefings and the
same PowerPoint presentations, and nothing changed.
HS2 finally got its planning application through for the haulage
route, but the Minister will be aware that that route is not yet
up and running. HS2 has not been able to access the land, because
the preparatory works are not yet completed. I do not just mean
the physical preparatory works; I mean all the other things that
need to happen, such as getting the licences and consents, and
working with Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council to put the
resources in place to make the project go forward. As a result,
the project is being delayed and the costs are rising.
What was HS2’s solution? To pursue the application for an
alternative route through Waste Lane and Kelsey Lane, which are
both small village lanes. Do not let the name Waste Lane fool
you, Madam Deputy Speaker; it is a beautiful lane, but HS2 wants
to use it to enable hundreds and hundreds of lorry movements day
in, day out. Both Waste Lane and Kelsey Lane are narrow
residential lanes. They are used by children to get to school,
and it is causing immense anxiety for my constituents to know
that there will be hundreds and hundreds of lorries going through
those lanes every day if HS2 gets its way.
How did we get here? It was obvious to my constituents from 2016
that HS2’s plan was to wind down the clock until only its options
remained viable. What a shame it could not just work with
everybody and find alternative ways to move the project forward.
The Minister will no doubt be aware that I am fighting any
solution that results in hundreds of lorries going up and down
Waste Lane and Kelsey Lane. Why should my constituents pay for
HS2’s arrogance, complacency and incompetence?
The second example that I want to use is that of residents who
have been blighted by HS2. My constituent in Berkswell village has a
property that is surrounded by an HS2 works compound. A small
portion of his property was identified for access requirements,
and he was entitled to compensation. He did not want to move out,
and the property was not compulsorily purchased, so there he is,
a literal neighbour to one of the compounds for HS2. I have
visited it, and he is completely surrounded. What does that get
him? HS2 making his life miserable, in his own home.
I have lost count of the number of times I have had to fight for
Iain, all because HS2 has decided to be slow and obstructive.
With continued damage to his property and his gates, as well as
dust, daily noise and work outside agreed hours, it is clear that
HS2 has no intention of upholding its responsibilities to Iain as
a good neighbour. In fact, he has to fight claim after claim
regarding damage on his property, with payments that are
constantly delayed.
Iain now suffers flood damage. A ruling from the Independent
Construction Commissioner stipulated that the contractor was
responsible for the damage, and Iain has submitted three
quotations for making good the damage. That is a reasonable way
to do things; many public sector bodies request three quotations.
But all he has been offered is an amount that does not even cover
the cost of replacing the carpet, which has been ruined, let
alone all the other damage internally and externally.
When we spoke, Iain said that he is sitting in a house where one
room is unusable because the carpet is saturated, it smells and
it is damp, and plasterwork is falling off the walls. He never
used to have damp issues; they started only two years ago, in
January 2021. Now he is fearful when it rains that water will
start pouring into the house and he will have to pump it out. It
was recommended that HS2 should provide proper drainage, but
nothing has materialised. To make matters worse, HS2 has now
referred the case to the small claims court, which is not the
correct process in such situations. It is as if HS2 has tried to
figure out ways to make Iain’s life more difficult.
I also want to highlight the case of Stephen Fletcher. He owns
Ram Hall Farm, a farm that has been in his family for six
generations and more than 140 years, and it produces the famous
Berkswell cheese. If the Minister is ever in Berkswell to see
what HS2 is up to, I invite him to visit Ram Hall Farm and sample
the cheese. I have been to the farm and sampled the cheese, and I
have seen what HS2 is up to right next door. Mr Fletcher is the
sole tenant of the land, but he also has a freehold farmhouse
that he jointly owns with his wife—a farmhouse that has now
dropped in value because it is blighted by HS2. Despite the
commitment that people along the route would be “at the heart” of
HS2’s property compensation schemes, that is not the reality.
Fairness, as encapsulated in the overarching principles of the
compensation code, requires that my constituent be compensated by
HS2, but all it does is frustrate the claim at every turn,
denying what he is owed and deserved. Once again, HS2 does not
care about being a good neighbour.
My asks here are simple. I ask the Minister to follow in the
footsteps of his predecessor, my right hon. Friend the Member for
Pendle (), who demanded that HS2
act as good neighbours and, frankly, review the way it deals with
blighted properties and blighted land. Ultimately, I want fast,
common-sense resolutions for my affected constituents, including
Stephen Fletcher and .
The third issue is that of the Balsall Common viaduct, and
subsequently, I fear, the Hampton in Arden viaduct; today, HS2
has released images of the Hampton in Arden viaduct, and I have
to say it is uglier than the Balsall Common viaduct. I will
reassure the Minister, though, and say that that matter is for
another debate on another day. I can only describe the Balsall
Common viaduct as a big concrete monstrosity in the middle of our
countryside. On 10 March, the Minister kindly wrote to me in
response to my letter of 16 January, in which I raised my
concerns about the Balsall Common viaduct. In his letter, the
Minister said he was keen to ensure that the process for engaging
local communities was working well. Well, I can assure him it is
not.
If HS2 Ltd is asked, it will say it has engaged with
constituents. The Minister wrote to me about the briefings it has
done and the “You said, we did” engagement event. However, those
engagements were nothing more than a tick-box exercise. I
attended the “You said, we did” event; in reality, it was the
“You said, and we did nothing” event. There were no alternatives
put forward, and no options that allayed the concerns of my
constituents, despite HS2 Ltd telling the Transport Committee
that it would offer alternative options. Instead of alternatives,
all we have is a proposal for a big, white, concrete elephant. In
fact, representatives of HS2 Ltd told local councillors that
engagement did not mean consultation. In other words, it did not
have to listen; it could just explain. Does the Minister agree
with that? Is HS2 correct that its engagement should be one of
explaining and not consulting?
The fact is, my constituents are being very reasonable. They have
already sacrificed so much. All they ask is that HS2 work with
them, rather than against them, to ensure that the viaduct can
fit with the local area and character and, ultimately, look
beautiful. It can be done. We just have to look at another one of
HS2’s viaducts, the Colne Valley viaduct, to see that viaducts
can actually be aesthetically beautiful. Even the one in
Birmingham, the so-called “Bellingham bridge”—named after Jude
Bellingham—has more character than what my constituents are being
punished with.
There were two things that stood out at the engagement event I
attended. I have a copy of the slides that I am happy to share
with the Minister. One of the concerns raised with me was about
graffiti. It is understandable that my constituents would be
concerned that a concrete block viaduct would be a red rag to
vandals. What was HS2’s answer to that concern? It spoke of its
zero-tolerance policy to graffiti, and referenced the graffiti
policy implemented on High Speed 1. However, in 2020-21, High
Speed 1 itself said that graffiti remains a “significant
issue”.
To appease my constituents, HS2 Ltd decided that rather than
addressing the substantive concerns, it would introduce a weaving
pattern in tribute to a flax plant that apparently grows in the
village of Berkswell. I have yet to find a constituent who is
appeased by these squiggly lines on the concrete, but I must say
this: if this had been an episode of “The Apprentice”, the person
who introduced that design would have soon found themselves on
the way home in the back of a taxi.
If HS2 Ltd wants to look at historical and meaningful references,
I suggest that it should be looking at the deep and rich history
of the inventors and architectural heavyweights who have built
this nation. Where is the nod to Sir Christopher Wren, or Brunel,
or even to the modern-day Sir Norman Foster? This very
building—this beautiful Palace in which we stand—was designed by
Augustus Pugin himself. Instead of trying to recreate their work,
HS2 Ltd is trying to give the people of Balsall Common a
recreation of spaghetti junction. Instead of giving them a piece
of artwork that we can remember and be proud of, it gave my
constituents flax.
On this issue, my ask is simple. As the Minister will know, it is
not too late to fix this. I have already objected to the planning
application, but HS2 can withdraw it and come up with better
plans. If it loses the planning application, it will simply
result in further delays. Let us fix this before it gets to that.
We need to demand that HS2 Ltd comes back with better plans. It
will move on from my village and my communities and they will be
left with ugly concrete blocks for decades if we do not do
anything. Let us challenge and push HS2 to do better. It is not
too late; we can and we should demand better. When I was elected,
I committed to holding HS2’s feet to the fire and I ask that the
Minister stand with me so that we can find viable, sustainable
and acceptable solutions.
Before I conclude, I pay tribute to the local parish councils and
residents associations who have done an immense job. I feel lucky
to have such a conscientious and pro-active group of parish
councils in my constituency. Berkswell Parish Council, Balsall
Parish Council, Hampton-in-Arden Parish Council and
Hampton-in-Arden society have all played their part. I also thank
the ward councillors who have been working very hard to get HS2
Ltd to listen.
I have a lot of time for the Minister—he has already engaged with
me on this issue, and I know that he was an excellent Chair of
the Transport Committee—but he should know that I will keep
coming back on these issues, I will keep requesting debates and I
will keep demanding answers. My constituents deserve to be
heard.
5.15pm
(Stone) (Con)
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Meriden () for giving me this
opportunity to make a short speech. I have a similar problem to
him. I have a dossier, which of course I have already passed to
the Minister, who has kindly agreed to come up to my
constituency. We have had 10 years of misery with HS2’s
miscommunications, as we have struggled to navigate a clear path
forward with it. Farmers have received plans that cut their farms
in half, severing access to their land and property. Notices have
been served as late as possible and with ill consideration for
damage and jeopardy. We have had loss of crops and late payment
of agreed fees, causing significant cash-flow problems and
financial ruin. Land has been left in a deplorable state. HS2 has
threatened to acquire “every area of land” with
“no assurance that any right of access will be granted in a
substantive form”.
It has deployed unnecessary and intimidating security on farms
that have been family homes for generations. In another instance,
no offer of a price for a property had been made nine months
after the valuer himself had been along to have a look at it.
The bottom line is that this is completely and totally
unacceptable. The truth is that HS2 needs to be given a real
rocket, and I look forward to the Minister doing just that. If he
does not, and my constituents continue to live in the misery to
which they have been subjected over all these years, it will be a
disgrace. It is a disgrace already, but it can be rectified. I
look forward to the Minister coming up to my constituency—north
and south—so that we can have a proper discussion and he can see
for himself how HS2 has let my constituency down.
5.17pm
The Minister of State, Department for Transport ()
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Meriden () for securing this debate and
my hon. Friend the Member for Stone ( ) for his contribution.
I grew up in a part of the country where both HS2 and East West
Rail are under construction, and indeed, I shall be in that town
this weekend again. I therefore fully recognise the change and
upheaval that HS2 can bring to the communities that it passes
through, represented by my hon. Friends and by Members across the
House. As construction approaches its peak, so too does the level
of disruption, and I appreciate that road closures, lorry
movements and noise are now a lived reality for many people. I
want to see HS2 Ltd leave a positive legacy for communities.
Communities should be appropriately consulted, responded to
efficiently and objectively, involved in plans and informed about
the works affecting them.
When things go wrong, which happens from time to time, efforts
should be made to learn from mistakes and come back with better
solutions. My hon. Friend the Member for Meriden mentioned his
constituents Mr Stephen Fletcher and Mr . I will write to him and ensure
that the matter is investigated. Where matters need to be dealt
with in their favour, we will do just that.
Perhaps I may focus on the two matters that were brought up with
regard to fixed structures, and indeed the roads. First, I
recognise my hon. Friend’s concern about the design of the
Balsall Common viaduct and the process that HS2 Ltd has gone
through to develop it. As I said in my letter to him, which he
referenced, I am keen to ensure that the process of engaging
local communities in the design of the project’s key elements,
such as the viaduct, is working well. I am aware that HS2 Ltd has
held a number of well-attended engagement events and briefings
with local people and their representatives as the design has
progressed over the year. Although I am assured by HS2 Ltd that
the viaduct has been carefully designed to reflect its
environmental context and position, I have also heard—as the
House has heard from my hon. Friend—that the engagement feels
like an explaining rather than a listening event.
I am keen to put on the record that good community ideas and
suggestions must be heard and worked upon. That is not only good
to ensure that the community receives the legacy that they want,
but it is polite. It is important to note that the options
considered as part of the design process are constrained by
certain factors, such as the structural performance requirements
of a high-speed railway. My hon. Friend has made unfavourable
comparisons with the design of another HS2 viaduct further south
in Colne Valley, which I visited some weeks back. HS2 Ltd
stresses that it is a different type of structure in a different
context. However, like me, HS2 Ltd will have heard my hon.
Friend’s call for the viaduct to fit with the local area and
character. The schedule 17 application for the design of the
Balsall Common viaduct was submitted in January, and the decision
currently rests with Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council. I
will await its decision with interest, as I know will my hon.
Friend.
Let me turn to the matters raised on Waste Lane and Kelsey Lane
and the appeals. I note my hon. Friend’s concerns about the use
of lorry routes in Balsall Common. The inspector has made a
recommendation to Ministers on the appeal, and the issue is now
being considered by Ministers in my Department and in the
Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities. We
anticipate a decision in the coming weeks. In the meantime, my
hon. Friend will understand that it would not be appropriate for
me to comment on the case, although I can say that the House has
heard his views on the appropriateness of Waste Lane and Kelsey
Lane.
Turning to community engagement concerns, including the matters
referenced by my hon. Friend the Member for Stone, the Department
takes the monitoring of HS2 construction seriously. HS2 Ltd and
its contractors are held to account by the independent
construction commissioner, the HS2 residents commissioner and the
Department for Transport’s team of independent construction
inspectors. I met the HS2 construction commissioner in February,
and the residents commissioner before that, to discuss current
issues affecting communities and to better understand how HS2 Ltd
and its contractors are responding to those challenges. Regular
reporting is just one of the ways in which we monitor and
proactively assure not just the cost and efficiency of the
project, but how HS2 is being delivered. HS2 Ltd and its
contractors are rightly required to comply with exacting
environmental requirements, including a comprehensive code of
construction practice, which specifies measures to minimise the
full range of impacts that any construction project has on
affected people and communities, as well as all the undertakings,
assurance and environmental commitments contained in the HS2
Acts.
Effective communication with affected parties is also crucial. I
thank my hon. Friends the Members for Meriden and for Stone for
giving examples of when we do not always get it right but we need
to do so. I am committed to making sure that issues are resolved
as quickly as possible and lessons are learned for the
future.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stone delivered a litany of
concerns on behalf of his constituents. He has asked for a rocket
to be delivered. I am not sure I will be arriving in his
constituency in a rocket, but I will come. He has asked me to see
whether these matters can be rectified. I know, working in
partnership with him, that we have every chance of doing a better
job, if he feels that job is not being done at the moment. I look
forward to visiting him and his constituents.
To conclude, I will continue to work as Rail Minister with hon.
and right hon. Members and others in the community on making sure
that we get the delivery of infrastructure projects right. I want
HS2 to be an example to other transport projects, not just in
what it delivers, but in the way it is delivered, and I recognise
that that means making improvements, learning from experience and
changing how we operate in order to become better, and I am
committed to HS2 Ltd doing that. Limiting construction impacts in
the first place should be a primary concern for all working on
HS2, but so should treating people and places with the respect
they deserve and ensuring that any impacts are mitigated or
avoided when not required.
I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Meriden and for Stone for
this debate. It is vital that we continue to discuss our
transport projects openly and transparently and that all hon. and
right hon. Members use this Chamber to press me to ensure that
their constituents are represented, as has happened here
today.
Question put and agreed to.
|