The MPs who voted against the Paving Bill

If your MP voted against the Paving Bill, please write and thank them.

The vote was 350 in favour, and 34 against. Only about a quarter of Labour MPs voted: those who stayed away include Ed Balls and Ed Miliband.

Conservatives who voted against

BAKER, Steve,
BARON, John,
BRIDGEN, Andrew,
BYLES, Dan
CASH, William
CHOPE, Christopher,
DAVIES, Philip,
DAVIS, David,
DORRIES, Nadine,
GILLAN, Cheryl, Rt Hon
HOLLOBONE, Philip,
JACKSON, Stewart
KELLY, Chris,
LEFROY, Jeremy,
LEWIS, Julian,
NUTTALL, David,
PAWSEY, Mark,
WHITE, Chris,
WIGGIN, Bill,
Teller: Noes
MAIN, Anne, Ms

Labour MPs who voted against

CORBYN, Jeremy,
CUNNINGHAM, Jim,
DOBSON, Frank, Rt Hon
ENGEL, Natascha,
FITZPATRICK, Jim,
GODSIFF, Roger,
HOEY, Kate,
MCDONNELL, John,
ROBINSON, Geoffrey,
SHEERMAN, Barry,
SKINNER, Dennis,
Teller:No
HOPKINS, Kelvin,

Other MPs voting against:

LUCAS, Caroline (Green)

EDWARDS, Jonathan (Plaid Cymru)
LLWYD, Elfyn (Plaid Cymru)
WILLIAMS, Hywel (Plaid Cymru)

4 comments to “The MPs who voted against the Paving Bill”
  1. Few MPs could have reviewed the 2011/2012 answers and interpretation and outcomes of HS2 public consultation to show how wrong the parties were.

    Transport north and south in Enlgand is shared mainly by the motoraways not the railways for intercity and longer commuting and delivery requirements. Speed is not possible above the 70mph and other statutory regulations.

    However in the future a faster speed motoraway would be possible for cars.
    A road rail combination would be less money to build than a road and separate railway as HS2.
    Demand in the larger population advancing to 80Million will require a new north south trunk transport corridor but with some vision that meets the reality not a single or fews view of the tomorrows world centred on HS2 a flimsy one track each way intercity railway with limited resilience.

  2. Interesting to note in respect of the Paving Bill “its all about compensating the victims”
    just how much parliamentary time/debate there was and media air time in respect of the victims compensation compared to the grave topic of ‘British Jam’ ……as opposed to ‘sweet spreads’ which is under EU threat apparently.

    Save one brave MP’s throttled attempt to raise the injustice; not enough time for the HS2 victims was allocated and (because of strategic interruption) allowed for their compensation ( as opposed their plight) save some oblique references that there was insufficient time. It was proffered “that there must be hope that matter will be addressed in the other place (House of Lords)
    Looking at the last HoL debate I doubt this will be dealt with their either (unless external public pressure is applied.
    well done HS2AA for trying to lobby the last debate)

    More time was spent on the potential ‘victims’ of EU jam fraud although my sense this was more about the manufacturers.
    Glad to know what is considered valued as debate. Stopping stealth asset stripping or stopping the reduction of sugar consumption.
    Strange definitions of “jam’ requires so much parliamentary protection whereas MPs shied away from their responsibilities having decided to vote for the Paving Bill but not discussing the compensation issues.

    F

  3. Each MP above and others in the no show group need thanking for their discerning judgement. England has transport infrastructure in need to changes because the capital shortage of the past 20 years has resulted in too many shortcomings in the railway upgrades and motorways that millions use. The lavish spending on a Y noded on Birmingham is a very poor plan and too many MPs cannot see the lack of transport services value in this mistaken configuration and very restricted one up and one down approach that mimics part of the GCR route. Better start again with a new alignment. David Cameron is where Harold Wilson found himself with TSR2 and at some point has to admit the project is not fit for the purpose for 2050 because it is only a one track each way railway. The nation needs more road capacity and in some areas rail can be added for 50%. The phase 1 of the Y Birmingham to Euston cannot be a Motorway through the Chilterns as the tunnels are costly and restrictive. A Northern section from London to near Peterborough and onto Newcastle built in section for both road and rail will provide the truck routes for the longer terms. The £50B and rising HS2 is simply not fit for the capacities required in the future for road and rail Perhaps these wiser people saw little value in HS2 but hundreds did not question this underwhelming plan. Better to try and advise more of the MPs who did not vote and those who followed the leaders without questions please.

  4. Pingback: The Independent View: What’s wrong with HS2?

Comments are closed.

2010-2019 © STOP HS2 – The national campaign against High Speed Rail 2