Meeting documents

The Chairman advised that a Motion to Council: "Enabling works for HS2 in Buckinghamshire" had been received from Mr Clare.

Mr Clare proposed the motion and highlighted his main points (appended to the minutes).

Mrs Macpherson seconded the motion and highlighted her main points to Council (appended to the minutes).

Mr Tett, Leader highlighted the following points:

• The long and proud record held by the Council in opposition to HS2.  The Council had been at the forefront of campaigning and had actively lobbied for mitigations since the bill had been passed.  Mr Tett stated that HS2 were woefully short with those mitigations
• The business case was flawed and the money could be better spent on improvements to existing commuter routes, high speed broadband and west to east connectivity.
• Mr Tett urged the Government to stop HS2 now and not to press ahead with a flawed business case. 
• Mr Tett looked forward in anticipation of the motion being passed and writing to the Secretaries of State on this dual strategy that impacted not only transport but also the environment.
• Dame Cheryl Gillan MP on the anticipated passing of the motion would also write to the Secretaries of State in support.
• Building on the success of the motion going through the district councils, Mr Tett stated that they spoke as one council to stop HS2 and urged Members to support the motion.

The Leader of the Opposition, Mr Lambert, highlighted the following points:

• Mr Lambert rose to support the motion.
• Following the announcement of HS2 in 2010 there had been immediate opposition due to the environmental impact.
• People’s property, the impact on local wildlife and the damage to historic woodland had not been taken into account.  Concerns were expressed over the effect on climate change and habitats.
• Dame C Gillan, MP had been a champion against  HS2 throughout the campaign and had spoken regularly in parliament. 
• Aylesbury MP, Mr David Lidington had formed a committee to vote against HS2 every step of the way, but had not followed through with this.
• Progression of transport lines needed to be made, but HS2 was not using modern technology to do this and was not the right approach,
• Birmingham would gain a lot of benefits from HS2 and had spent millions of pounds on upgrading the infrastructure of the city centre to accommodate the project.  It was suggested that the full environmental impact was not understood.
• Mr Lambert wanted the motion to be amended to include all MPs in Buckinghamshire and not just the government. 
• Mr Lambert thanked the HS2 BCC Officers for the work they had done.

The Chairman invited Members to debate the motion and the following main points were made:

• The business case for HS2 was not strong.
• The concerns of residents had not been taken into account by HS2.
• HS2 would have a serious impact on the environment, local wildlife and habitats.
• The project should be discontinued, and funding should be used to improve the existing railway lines.
• Money would be better invested in providing relief roads in Iver and around Aylesbury.  This would relieve congestion and improve air quality.
• There was no economic case for HS2 with a cost of £150 billion.
• The damage to the environment and costs of HS2 outweighed the benefits.
• There had been cases of residents experiencing severe distress over HS2 who had decided to move out of Buckinghamshire because of it.
• Members and residents should unite together to stop the project.
• The resolution should be passed unanimously.

The Chairman put forward the following Motion to Council:

This Council proposes that the Leader should write to Government to request that all enabling works for HS2 in Buckinghamshire should be paused until the Notice to Proceed to main works contractors has been approved.  As required by the Department of Transport, Notice to Proceed should not be given until management capability, affordability of contracts and robustness of revised business case have all been proven. We see no reason why the County should suffer significant disruption and long term environmental destruction until detailed design and cost has been approved.  We also ask that HS2 Ltd significantly improves the effectiveness of its community engagement with those impacted by the line.

RESOLVED: The proposed Motion was voted upon by a show of hands. This was carried unanimously.