Articles
What a difference a new job makes
It feels like only yesterday when Justine Greening, a young MP, ambitious and eager to impress her superiors and constituents, made a name for herself fighting government proposals to build a third runway at Heathrow. Today, not quite three months into her first job as Secretary of State, her transformation from idealistic public servant to cynical politician seems complete.
Back before her ministerial career, Greening was apoplectic over the decision to expand Heathrow against the interests of so many local residents, burnishing her activist credentials by buying a plot of land and threatening legal recourse to derail a government that refused to listen to the will of the people.
Greening then was ultimately successful, as will opponents to HS2 be once it too, lacking a business case and bereft of public support, finally runs out of steam. But it’s damning that, in refusing to base her judgement on HS2 on either common sense or popular opinion, she has proven so ready to betray the sense of democracy and fair play that her earlier career was built on.
Let’s look at the facts: the table below shows quite clearly the level of opposition to HS2 in the public consultation last year. The only question where both ‘for’ and ‘against’ camps enjoyed rough parity was when respondents were asked if they were generically in favour of high speed rail. And given that the government has admitted that 24% of all votes were automatically generated by the Yes to HS2 campaign, frankly it’s amazing that the pro-camp could not secure a majority even for this simple question.
Greening promised a rational look at the facts but she has ignored the will of the people and also the cold, hard logic that there are alternatives to HS2 which would deliver greater value and deal with Britain’s transport infrastructure needs more quickly and in a more environmentally friendly and cost effective way. In her own words, “If the Government will not listen in Parliament, then ministers will find they have to listen in the courts."
|
Question |
Agree |
Disagree |
|
Q1. Do you agree that there is a strong case for enhancing the capacity and performance of Britain's inter-city rail network to support economic growth over the coming decades? |
21,630 |
23,462 |
|
Q2.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 for money solution (best balance of costs and benefits) for enhancing rail capacity and performance? |
16,365 |
31,789 |
|
Q3. 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 the High Speed 1 line to the Channel Tunnel? |
2,770 |
26,197 |
|
Q4. Do you agree with the principles and specification used by HS2 Ltd to underpin its proposals for new high speed rail lines and the route selection process HS2 Ltd undertook? |
3,136 |
28,455 |
|
Q5. 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? |
2,784 |
28,163 |
|
Q6. Do you wish to comment on the Appraisal of Sustainability of the Government’s proposed route between London and the West Midlands that has been published to inform this consultation? |
772 |
14,170 |
|
Q7. 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 line? |
3,197 |
16,027 |
For the full report, follow this link.