Shannon supported Clarke's call for fair treatment of farmers affected by HS2. He highlighted that not compensating them effectively can never be acceptable and questioned whether compensation should cover loss of earnings.

Fabricant provided an example of a constituent, Siân Froggatt, whose land was compulsorily purchased despite not being used for the railway and is now up for sale on the open market. He questioned how this could be justified.

I thank the hon. Member for Stafford (Theo Clarke) for securing this debate. I wish to focus on the experiences of constituents with one particular scheme: the special circumstances or atypical properties scheme. The scheme was set up in recognition that some residents and businesses near the HS2 route may need assistance, despite not meeting the eligibility requirements of other schemes. My constituent's property value has been severely impacted by construction activities such as haul road constructions and embankments. Facing long-term blight and delays in compensation processes led to unnecessary stress and financial burden for my constituents. The lack of formal application process and opaque procedures have caused significant distress among those affected.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford on securing the debate. HS2's cancellation of phase 2 was welcomed by many but has left significant uncertainty regarding land returns and compensation processes. I highlight issues such as delayed land return, lack of clarity for those impacted, and inconsistent treatment by HS2. One farming business faced extended temporary possession and partial land purchases despite the scheme’s cancellation, causing operational difficulties without proper compensation. A small nursery business endured restrictions on hedge maintenance imposed by HS2, adding to their financial burden. These cases illustrate the need for immediate clarity and fair resolution from HS2.

Committed to securing compensation for constituents affected by HS2 blight and loss of economic opportunities. Criticised the initial cost estimate underestimation and the impact on regeneration plans, highlighting a specific case in Measham village. Emphasised psychological tactics used by HS2 during property valuations, alleging unfair practices against sellers.

Defended an earlier design for HS2 proposed before Lord Adonis's involvement, suggesting it would have been cheaper and more feasible with connections to major transport hubs like Birmingham New Street and Manchester Piccadilly.

Congratulates the Member for Stafford on securing the debate and presses the Government to compensate Crewe following the cancellation of HS2 from Birmingham to Crewe. Acknowledges disappointment in his constituents and local businesses due to lost economic opportunities but recognises other proposals like Network North, which will provide benefits. Highlights that Cheshire East has spent over £11 million preparing for HS2, much of which was predicated on long-term Government commitments and now goes unrealised. Emphasises the need for additional compensation beyond what Crewe would expect if HS2 had never been planned.

Congratulates the Member for Stafford on securing the debate and details the plight faced by landowners, small business owners, farmers, and road users in his constituency due to HS2. Outlines specific cases of legal disputes over property compensation, road closures impacting businesses, cattle losses from poor soil management, and disruptions to daily life including travel congestion and damage to roads. Criticises HS2 Ltd for its attitude towards affected communities and calls for better practices and adequate compensation.

I thank my near neighbour and hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Theo Clarke) for introducing this debate. We have heard a catalogue of problems from various colleagues here on both sides of the House. The sad thing is that they are not unique. They are repeated up and down the country. When I was a Whip, I instituted a system—I am looking at my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Ruth Edwards), who is the Whip, to see whether this system still operates—where we would look at our Members of Parliament to see how many staff they got through in a short period, because clearly there was a problem if someone could not hold on to their staff for long. We would think that the Minister or Back Bencher in question was seriously flawed in some way. How many chairmen and chief executives has HS2 gone through? It has gone through a lot, because they are flawed in a serious way; they are dysfunctional. It is extraordinary, and it just demonstrates what an organisation this is—not only dysfunctional, but unfair. In an intervention, I talked about my constituent Siân Froggatt, who is not being allowed to reclaim land that was compulsorily taken from her, even though the land is now not needed because the railway is not going ahead on phase 2a. I might add that she is still waiting to be paid—waiting to be paid, and still unable able to reclaim that land. I took the opportunity of looking at my cellphone during the debate, not because I was looking at tractors or anything like that, but because I was doing some research about the Crichel Down rules. It says on the Government’s own website that ‘The Crichel Down Rules require government departments… to offer back surplus land to the former owner or the former owner’s successors at the current market value.’ Not only is it not being offered back at a reasonable price, but it is often not being offered back to the same people. I came in at the very last moment to speak in this debate, so I will not take up a great deal of time. I will listen with interest to the Minister’s response, which I suspect might be the same as the answer he gave yesterday in a different debate regarding the Handsacre junction, which happens to be in my constituency. I ask that in these dying days of HS2—dying days in one way or another—the Government get a grip and ensure that, just we asked in the previous debate, justice is done for our constituents. The sense of justice we have in this nation extends not only to His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, as in the previous debate, but to HS2 Limited in this one.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Stafford (Theo Clarke) on securing this important debate and thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting the time. I also thank the right hon. Member for South Staffordshire (Sir Gavin Williamson) and the hon. Members for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green), for North West Leicestershire (Andrew Bridgen), for Crewe and Nantwich (Dr Mullan), for Buckingham (Greg Smith) and for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) for contributing to the debate. The stories we have heard, and those that have been reported over the years, show the very real consequences of this Tory HS2 fiasco—[Interruption.] There is some muttering from Conservative MPs. If the civil service and the Department for Transport were not involved in the decision to cancel that was announced by the Prime Minister in Manchester—it was done on the back of a fag packet, which has been used today, all day—it is no wonder that we got this type of fiasco. We have heard of people having to leave the family home that they worked hard for, businesses having to pack up and leave their premises, towns and villages seeing homes targeted after they were bought and later left to rot, and farmers being forced to move or unable to use their land for years because of more and more delays to HS2. Communities have had their future put on pause for years and families have found getting compensation to be a painful and drawn-out experience. Lives and businesses have been disrupted for a decade, and for what? A staggering £65 billion high-speed train line that will now not even reach the communities that have been impacted—a train line that, according to the chair of HS2, will result in fewer seats and longer journeys for those travelling north of Birmingham. What a result for the people living in those communities and across the north. All that is even before we consider how much taxpayers’ money has been spent on the compensation. According to reports, almost £423 million has been spent buying up 424 properties on the western leg from Birmingham to Manchester, and £164 million spent buying 530 ‘blighted’ properties on the eastern leg to Leeds. Today comes the news that the Government are lifting safeguarding on the land; not content with cancelling high-speed rail to the north, the Prime Minister has now decided to salt the earth. If we were not aware already, that must be the final nail in the coffin for levelling-up. Like Napoleon out of Moscow, it is routed through the poisoned-earth strategy with the lifting of the safeguarding today. We have to be responsible. We will have to see what the books tell us if we are to enter Government in the weeks or months to come.

Commended the hon. Friend for securing this important debate and acknowledged all contributions from Members. He discussed the lifting of safeguarding directions along the former HS2 route between the west midlands and Crewe, clarifying that lifting safeguarding does not trigger a sell-off of property already acquired by the Secretary of State. Merriman also addressed specific concerns raised by other Members such as continuing safeguarding near Handsacre village, amending safeguarding on the remaining phase 2 route, and offering surplus land and property back to original owners under certain circumstances. He promised to meet affected constituents to discuss outstanding issues and reiterated that HS2 Ltd is succeeding in closing down claims despite complexities.

Asked whether the Minister accepts that HS2 did not pay a fair market price at the time of acquisition for properties. He emphasised concerns over fairness and just compensation for property owners.

Demanded transparency and requested the Minister to ensure that HS2 Ltd up its game in handling difficult cases, especially those mentioned during the debate.

Mr Clarke thanked the Minister for listening to constituents' concerns regarding HS2. He acknowledged contributions from various MPs and welcomed the Minister's commitment to visit his constituency and provide written responses on individual cases. Mr Clarke emphasised that there is still uncertainty over HS2, and he welcomed the Government’s intention to resolve outstanding compensation claims.