A Visit to HS1

I spent Friday in Kent looking first-hand at the impact that the Channel Tunnel High Speed rail route had had there. I travelled to Ashford with the Managing Director of Southeastern,  the rail company that operates the local rail services serving the whole of Kent.  In the county, I met parish councillors from two villages beside which HS1 was built, local campaigners fromk the Ebbsfleet/Gravesham area, Kent County Councillors and KCC officers, including planners who had been closely involved in coping with the railway’s construction and operation. I also stood right by the HS1 route while both a local fast service and a Eurostar train passed.

Inevitably, one day can only give you a brief impression of what people in Kent went through and live with now. To start with, there are two major differences between HS1 and the proposed HS2. First, Kent actually has stations – at Ashford and Ebbsfleet- and not just the Eurostar services but fast local services run along the HS1 tracks. So there are some benefits to local people in terms of better services to be weighed against the adverse impact. Second, for most of its length HS1 runs alongside a six-lane motorway. There is simply no comparison between that and the Misbourne Valley route. To label them equally as “transport corridors” is risible.

Southeastern told me that they now had more passengers from towns like Ashford and Folkestone using the high speed services than using the conventional trains, despite a 20 per cent fare premium for the high speed option. They argued that passengers were willing to pay the extra because they valued the time saved from the daily commute and the opportunities that that gave to them for leisure and family life. I challenge them as to whether this meant that they were  providing a rich man’s service. They denied this, arguing that their trains were used by people on average incomes too. In don’t know whether there are published figures to show the number of passengers from different income groups. The local campaigners and parish councillors were more sceptical about the transport benefits. they said that the Department for Transport’s original predictions of passenger numbers and revenue had not come close to being fulfilled and said that they resented paying through taxes and higher fares for a line that only a minority of the county’s population used.

It was difficult to gauge the noise impact, in large part because the proximity of the motorway inevitably dulled the impact of train noise. While the noise from the two trains that I observed was less intrusive and shorter in duration than I had expected, those trains were shorter and travelling more slowly (140mph for the local service and 180 mph for Eurostar) than is predicted for HS2 (250 mph).  Local campaigners said that while noise barriers did work pretty well, out in open country with no noise barrier the impact was much greater. To my mind this reinforced the need for detailed and reliable noise maps to be available for study and comment before any final decision is taken on HS2.

I saw a cut and cover tunnel at the edge of one village. Visually, I would not immediately have known that there was a tunnel there had I not been expecting it. The village road had been reinstated over the top of the tunnel and the depth of the topsoil layer meant that oak trees were now growing on top of the structure. However, the parish councillor from that village said that construction had meant disruption, temporary road closures and diversions and a lot of dust over a couple of years. He also said that compensation had been ungenerous and taken far too long to get settled. Kent County Council briefed me about rescue archaeology along the route and on how some historic buildings had been dismantled and relocated.

In terms of lessons learned, Kent CC said that with hindsight they would have engaged earlier over the issue of overhead gantries, which were visually very intrusive, and tried to get the DfT to waive its normal rules about safety barriers on bridges. It was the inflexible imposition of these rules that had left a number of country lanes looking permanently suburbanised, when there was no objective need for large concrete barriers in such locations. One of the things that had worked well was the establishment of an environmental fund, financed by central government and administered by an independent trust, that could give local groups grants to finance local environmental projects.

What came across from all the conversations I had is that that people in Kent, whether officials, councillors or grass-roots campaigners are happy to share their experiences with colleagues in Buckinghamshire. They too had to go through the experience of learning very quickly about a range of technical issues and drawing on their knowledge may help Bucks constituents in their campaign.

 

 

HS2: Network Rail Study

This study was mentioned in a lot of this morning’s broadcast media but was not, when I checked, available on Network Rail’s web site. However, a journalist has kindly emailed me a copy which I have posted here.

 

Doc005 Network Rail Strategic Alternatives FINAL (2)

A Letter from AVDC Regarding Future Housing Aylesbury Vale

I recently received the below information from Aylesbury Vale District Council concerning a consultation they are due to launch on the 1^st December concerning the number of homes that should be created in Aylesbury Vale up to the year 2031. I would encourage anyone with strong views to respond to the consultation to ensure their voice is heard.

Back to earth!

Douglas Hurd once said to me when he was Foreign Secretary that one of the  strongest reasons to support the British system of having one MP for each constituency (a lot of democracies use proportional systems with multi-member constituencies) is that it kept your feet on the ground. For him, it was having to come back from international meetings with the likes of Mikhail Gorbachev and talks about the end of the Cold War, to sit in a draughty church hall in Oxfordshire while people came and shouted at him about the Poll tax.

It was a bit like that this Friday. After three days in the States, I was back (rather jet-lagged) to a full constituency programme. I started in High Wycombe, where (along with my colleagues Dominic Grieve and Steve Baker) , I was briefed by the leaders of Wycombe District Council about housing, planning and economic development issues. Then to Aylesbury for an update from Arla on their plans to build a  huge new dairy just off the A41 Aston Clinton bypass. The company is making further changes to its proposals in response to local comment and intends to submit a formal planning application to Aylesbury Vale District Council in a few weeks’ time. I’ve told them that when they have settled on their final plan and submitted it, I will want to visit the site to get a clear idea of what the visual and noise impact the new development would have on the local area.

The afternoon brought the usual three hours of constituency surgery cases (letters to dictate over the weekend) and then in the evening I went to the public meeting organised by Stoke Mandeville Parish Council to discuss HS2. There were well over 200 people present. The Eskdale Road Community Centre was full – not just the hall but the two small meeting rooms as well- and people were standing in the foyer and outside the windows of the hall too. Obviously people were very worried about the local impact if the scheme goes ahead, especially since the Secretary of State has now confirmed (see earlier posts) that the current plan involves re-routing both the A4010 Risborough Road and Marsh Lane over the top of the HS2 line, something which , because of masts and gantries needed for the railway, would involve a high flyover. But both the presentations from the platform and the questions from the hall focussed on the business case and the claimed national interest justification for this proposal. People asked about the forecasts of passenger demand, whether ordinary families could ever afford an HS2 fare, whether the project could be afforded, whether it would regenerate northern cities or just draw more jobs to London and whether other improvements to rail and road networks could provide a less costly and less environmentally destructive answer to the need to provide additional capacity. Throughout, the tone of the meeting was calm, focussed and serious. These were not people who can be dismissed as NIMBYs.

Report calls for better Bucks rail services as part of HS2 project

Greengauge 21 is a company that has long supported High Speed Rail, and has weighed in behind the HS2 proposal. They’ve recently published a report in which they argue that it would be possible for the government to link HS2 to improvements to local rail services that would give people in Bucks and neighbouring counties some benefits to set against the financial and environmental costs of HS2.

They say that new services could be run from Aylesbury to Watford Junction and the West Coast Main Line via a new (but oft-mooted) Croxley link and that a new link to Heathrow could provide direct rail access to and from the airport for the Wycombe-Risborough branch of the Chiltern Line.

It’s an interesting line of argument and one that I hadn’t heard before. Better local rail services would be attractive, though I noted that Greengauge did not envisage these being provided until after HS2 had been completed. Indeed, they seem to reckon that the prospect of a direct Chiltern Line-Heathrow connection in particular would have to wait until much later. And of course money would have to be found to finance the new links suggested.

Of course nothing that Greengauge suggests would lessen the environmental impact of HS2 and I doubt that their proposals would make any difference either to the business case for HS2 which is the subject of such vigorous controversy. But I’d be interested to know what my constituents think.

 

Constituency business

Apart from my regular constituency surgery to deal with problems brought to me by individual constituents, I had two important meetings this Friday.

One was a further meeting with representatives from the local campaign groups and local authorities about HS2. You might recall that I convened a similar meeting earlier this year and we agreed then that we ought to meet up again once the Department for Transport had published its consultation documents. It was a pretty intensive meeting, discussing various ideas for further letters and FOI requests (I’ll post on the detailed follow-up later) and allowing us all to share ideas about how to make sure that the voice of local people is properly heard during the consultation. I know that the HS2 Action Alliance and Stop HS2 are waiting for further analysis from their experts before putting in formal submissions and their advice to residents is to hold off submitting a response to the consultation until that analysis of their Department’s official documents, including its revised business case and its Appraisal of Sustainability is available.

The other meeting was with a group of major local employers under the banner of the Buckinghamshire Enterprise and Learning Partnership (BELP). In some respects we are lucky. The local economy has not been hit as badly in the recession as some other parts of the country. But we can’t be complacent. The rise in joblessness in both Wycombe and Aylesbury has been steep, though from a very low base and with the current rates of unemployment still well below the national average. We talked about a number of different issues affecting local business. What was encouraging was to hear the determination of employers to make the case for more businesses to locate to our part of the world and to campaign for business-friendly policies by both local and central government.

One

HS2 Noise Maps

You may be interested to see the noise maps for HS2, which can be found in an appendix to the ‘Appraisal of Sustainability’ document which was published alongside the public consultation on HS2.  I have provided a link to that document here - the relevant map can be found on page 65 (or page 73 if using Adobe reader).

I am concerned that some constituents without access to internet may not be able to see a copy of these noise maps, and feel that it is important that everyone has an opportunity to be fully informed of the facts before they write a response to the public consultation.  I will write a letter to HS2 Ltd about this matter, and will post it on the web-site as soon as possible.

Noise Impact of HS2

A colleague of mine in Parliament, Tony Baldry MP, recently tabled a Written Parliamentary Question asking the Secretary of State for Transport about the noise impact of HS2.  You may be interested to see a copy of the response that he received below:

In the Secretary of State’s response you will notice that he refers to a document called ‘Appraisal of Sustainability Technical Appendix 5′.  A copy of the relevant section of that document can be found below:

Council Relaxes Rules for Royal Wedding Street Parties

I have been informed that Transport for Buckinghamshire, working with the District Councils, has lifted the necessary temporary traffic regulation orders in order to permit street parties to celebrate the Royal Wedding.

Applications for road closures will be accepted for 29 April (the day of the Royal Wedding), as well as the three days following it.

I hope that this decision will allow local residents to mark this exciting occasion with an enjoyable street party, which can now be held safely.

Further information and application forms can be found on the relevant sections of the district councils’ web-sites:

Aylesbury Vale District Council

Wycombe District Council

Transport Select Committee to Investigate High Speed Rail

The House of Commons Transport Select Committee has announced that it will conduct an inquiry into the strategic case for High Speed Rail.

The Committee will investigate the core arguments for and against High Speed Rail.  This will include a critical analysis of the business case for HS2 and the argument that it will help regenerate the North.  The committee will also look at the environmental impact of HS2.   

I am pleased that the committee has decided to investigate the strategic case for HS2.  Many of my constituents are concerned that the business case does not stack up, and it is important that the committee has the opportunity to scrutinise it. 

Commons Select Committees undertake important work by investigating policy issues, scrutinising the work and expenditure of the Government, and examining proposed legislation.  They are formed of at least 11 MPs.  After agreeing on an inquiry and its terms of reference, they gather written and oral evidence, before reporting their findings to the Commons.  Their reports are also printed and published online.  The Government then produces a formal response – normally within 60 days.

Further details on the committee’s inquiry into High Speed Rail can be found on its web-site here.

More information on how Select Committees work can be found in this fact-sheet.