• The consultation questions can be answered online, or a hard copy can be requested at either the road show, or by email. Further details are on the HS2 Ltd website www.HS2.org.uk  

• There is a wealth of information on this website and on the StopHS2 www.stopHS2.org and HS2 Action Alliance www.HS2aa.com websites

• Below is the list of the consultation questions and some suggested responses, though it is recommended that you use your own words, as identical responses will be screened for and excluded.

HS2 CONSULTATION – THE QUESTIONS

(AND SUGGESTIONS AS TO RESPONSES)*

Many local travel projects would get squeezed out as a result of the expenditure on HS2. 

We need a properly costed, financially affordable, integrated national transport strategy, not a vanity project. 

Question Two; “Do you agree that a national high speed rail network from London to Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester (the Y network) would provide the best value of money solution for enhancing rail capacity and performance?”

We believe that Rail Package 2 is the best value for money option for achieving those objectives, and to ask about the ‘Y-Network’, when limited plans have only been provided as far as Staffordshire in this consultation is unreasonable.  There has been no detailed analysis of the Y option, just superficial assumptions.  It would be fair to assume budget cost overruns on construction of HS2 and, using Hs1 as an example, a passenger demand shortfall and a heavily subsidised service would result.  To the HS2 proposal; no.

Question Three; “Do you agree with the Government’s proposals for the phased roll-out of a national high speed rail network, and for links to Heathrow Airport, and to the High Speed 1 Line and the Channel Tunnel?”

The question does not refer specifically to HS2, it asks about national high speed train projects in general. No, we do not believe HS2 should be built at all.  Rail upgrades to infrastructure, capacity and speed should begin as soon as possible, be carefully evaluated as to national AND local benefit and investment made where the business case is most beneficial to passengers and the economy. London and Birmingham are not the only conurbations who require better services, EVERYONE does. 

There are no DIRECT links to Heathrow, or Hs1 (Channel Tunnel)  proposed under HS2.  Just between London and Birmingham. Stops to change trains, or walk between stations, to go to Hs1, Heathrow or Birmingham airports, yes.  That is not integrated!

Question Four; “Do you agree with the principles and specification used by HS2 Ltd to underpin proposals for new high speed rail lines and the route selection process HS2 Ltd undertook?”

No.  There is no DIRECT integration with most any existing railways, roads, airports, docks or freight links.  We live in a small, very developed, crowded island, not France, Spain or China.  Rail schemes should be designed to take account of our own specific transport needs.  RP2 would seem to be the best option for UK rail transport requirements. 

Most environmental organisations, local and national, are opposed to the route and scheme in its present form, on business as well as environmental grounds.

Question Five; “Do you agree that the Government’s proposed route, including the approach proposed for mitigating its impacts, is the best option for a new high speed rail line between London and the West Midlands?”

No, the only principle used in route selection was that the straightest line possible between two points was chosen.  Anyone who can use a ruler and pencil, could have designed the route.

Paragraph 5.85 of the HS2 Consultation clearly states; “Mitigation options cannot be identified in full or committed to at this stage, since they rely on design detail which has not been developed. For example, to design the provision of noise barriers alongside the route would first require assessments of the noise impacts.” This clearly shows HS2 has not done sufficient work around these issues, prior to public consultation. 

'Two million trees', have been promised by the Secretary of State.  Is that wall to wall Leylandi then?  Or native species?  The ones that lose their leaves, that fall on to railway lines?  The ones that stop trains?

The most obvious comment regarding these documents, is that they are incomplete, incorrect and contradictory, and as a result, certainly not good enough to form the basis of a proper consultation.  The Environmental Impact Assessment will only be produced AFTER the Government has made a decision. 

The proposed route is hugely damaging to larges swathes of rapidly diminishing green belt, whereas the RP2 upgrade is much more environmentally sensitive.  And cheaper.  And can start now.

Question Seven; “Do you agree with the options set out to assist those whose properties lose a significant amount of value as a result of any new high speed rail line?”

There appears to be further consultation on compensation, but only AFTER the decision to build the line has been made.  Extensive property blight has already been caused by the proposals and there are no final or definitive indications of how or when people will be compensated for this, if at all.  There will also be considerable uncompensated blight during the construction phase.  If the project is 'in the national interest', as we have been repeatedly told, then the people affected should be properly and immediately compensated for it, not be the financial victims of it.  If the government cannot afford to compensate people properly for loss, then it cannot afford the scheme at all.  They should not ruin lives and disposes people of their homes and savings.

HS2 CONSULTATION – THE DEADLINE

You are asked to respond to the 7 consultation questions by 29 July 2011.  You should provide a cover letter stating clearly how you feel about HS2, and state that you wish your letter to be considered as part of your response. This letter, along with your answers to the 7 questions, must be in your own words.  You might want to consider including some of the following points in your letter:

• you oppose HS2 because it is NOT how we want to spend £30bn of our money i.e. opportunity cost (take a leaf out of the 'AV' book and would rather have x number of doctors, hospitals etc or the money spent on roads etc etc)

• you can see no robust evidence that one new train line, that reduces journey times by 30 mins (in today's timetable), will in 16 years, solve the North South divide

• you found the consultation materials difficult to understand, the questions ambiguous, and leading 

 *The suggested responses are the opinion of SAAG only.  They have been formulated after careful deliberation and study of the facts as they have been presented and interpreted.  No responsibility is accepted for accuracy.  E&OE

There is an alternative to HS2, its called Rail Package 2 (RP2)

The alternative to HS2 is to double the standard class capacity of the West Coast, East Coast and Midlands main lines through train lengthening and replacing one underused first class carriage for a standard class carriage. This meets HS2 demand projections into the 2040s. In-cab signalling will allow speeds to increase to 140mph. Dealing with a small number of pinch points will treble current WCML capacity, but only one (Ledburn) needs urgent action.
 

It may not be so glamorous but as a businessman I know that making the most of existing assets - especially when they have been subject to so much investment - makes a great deal more sense than spending £33bn on a project that replicates the disaster of HS1. This HSR line from Ashford is running at just a third of forecast demand, cost the taxpayer billions and left commuters up in arms over cuts to local services. Meanwhile expected regeneration has been so weak that house prices in Ashford have actually fallen relative to areas away from HS1.

So yes to HSR, but no to a project that panders to the ambitions of the NEC and Birmingham Airport, leaves so many travellers worse off and will cost us all an arm and a leg.

DON’T BE FOOLED BY GOVERNMENT SPIN!

HS2 versus RP2 is a simple choice. RP2 delivers more benefits to more people more quickly and costs far less money. Or this should be a simple choice, but the Government just want HS2.

*HS2 is still being calculated on third quarter 2009 costs & Stage 2 will cost another £14.4bn. Last month, after RP2 had become a popular alternative, the Department for Transport increased the cost from just under £6bn to just under £9bn. Other rail experts have said RP2 could cost as little as £2bn and RP2 can be done bit by bit, so unlike HS2, it’s not all or nothing at a time of austerity and cuts.