House of Commons · Bill Debate
19 January 2021 · 13 other contributors
Opened by Andrew Stephenson Con Pendle
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Andrew Stephenson raised concerns about high speed rail (london-west midlands) bill - clause 58 and related lords amendments in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
Key points
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
The Government accepts all the amendments made by the other place to this Bill, particularly highlighting Lords amendment 2 which requires annual reports on the impact of HS2 construction on ancient woodland. Also supporting Lords amendment 3 for further consultation in Shropshire, Staffordshire and Cheshire despite initial opposition due to extensive prior consultations but recognising local concerns.
Supports the Bill and Lords amendment 3 for enhanced consultation in affected areas, highlighting insufficient transport links and local engagement. Emphasises concerns over underinvestment, ballooning costs and commitment to Leeds leg of HS2.
She criticises HS2 for its cost, environmental impact, and lack of meaningful consultation. She points to public polls showing unpopularity, a petition with over 136,000 signatures, and specific cases where trees were cut down without proper consultation in her constituency.
He argues that the original rationale for HS2 is no longer valid due to changes brought about by the pandemic. He questions whether the project should be reassessed and if it might become unviable with changing travel patterns.
He expresses concern for the safety of his constituents in Woore due to HS2's decision to route through a narrow road. He supports the proposed mitigation measures but demands they are financed and implemented by HS2.
He endorses the views of other speakers, stating that HS2 is profoundly unpopular in his constituency. He highlights environmental damage and property devaluation caused by the project.
He supports Lords amendment 2 due to environmental concerns. HS2 will impact 11 ancient woodlands directly, with a total of 63 at risk across the UK. He questions the economic justification for HS2 given other pressing infrastructure needs.
He argues that capacity can be increased more cost-effectively through digitalisation and bypass track improvements, rather than building HS2. Post-pandemic changes in work patterns may reduce peak-hour travel demands.
He supports Lords amendments 2 and 3 to protect ancient woodlands and ensure local resident consultation due to significant disruption caused by HS2 construction in Staffordshire. He highlights the importance of consulting residents regarding traffic disruptions, railhead construction, HGVs, and environmental impacts.
HS2 must be transformative for Stoke-on-Trent, an area with significant economic potential. The amendment requires HS2 services to terminate at Manchester and includes provisions for classic network compatibility to facilitate additional local services. It also mandates better engagement from HS2 with the city council to mitigate construction impacts such as traffic congestion on junction 15 of the M6 and improvements in public transport, including reopening stations like Meir.
Supports Lords amendment 3 as it ensures HS2 benefits residents of Crewe and surrounding areas. It acknowledges the town's railway heritage and seeks to deliver high-skilled jobs, particularly if Bombardier wins a bid for building HS2 trains. The amendment also requires improved local transport connections, addressing concerns over adverse impacts on roads during construction.
Welcomes the consultation mandated by Lords amendment 3 in Staffordshire and Cheshire for HS2 mitigation. Emphasises that services from Stoke-on-Trent must extend to Manchester or Birmingham, avoiding premature terminations which are insufficient. Highlights the need for improved public transport connections for Newcastle-under-Lyme, currently lacking a railway station.
Acknowledged contributions from other Members, thanked the hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi) and his party for their support of HS2, emphasised the importance of the integrated rail plan which would be published soon to bring together transformational investments across the midlands and north of England, discussed delays in receiving the National Infrastructure Commission's rail-needs assessment but committed to considering stakeholder critiques before responding. He addressed concerns about the timing of HS2, stating it as a long-term investment despite current pandemic challenges.
Questioned the reasons for moving forward with HS2 at the current time, raised concerns about patterns of travel potentially having structurally changed due to remote conferencing technologies like Zoom which could reduce business-related peak-time capacity and thus impact the necessity of the project.