Cheryl Gillan: HS2 blank cheque Bill is premature

Cheryl Gillan says having the HS2 blank cheque Bill is premature

If you agree with Cheryl and Stop HS2 that there are two many unanswered questions about the HS2 finances for MPs to vote now, please write to your MP and tell them!  The Telegraph has an article about the vote: please make it clear you want them to vote against the Bill.

From Cheryl’s website

At Business Questions in the House of Commons on Thursday 13 June, Mrs Gillan asked the Leader of the House, Andrew Lansley, to put off the Parliamentary process until four issues have been settled.

These are:

  1. The consultation on the draft environmental statement for High Speed 2.
  2. The Court of Appeal proceedings.
  3. The Information Commissioner’s call for the Major Projects Authority’s detailed report on HS2 to be published.
  4. The adverse National Audit Office report on the financing of aspects of the project.

An easy way to write to your MP is by using the tool at to write an email.

3 comments to “Cheryl Gillan: HS2 blank cheque Bill is premature”
  1. Perhaps there are some legal minds out there who can help me with this connundrum?

    The ECHR recognize that the right to enjoyment of a home should not be interfered with, but accepts that the economic well being of the country may be at times contrary to this principle, and this is acceptable as long as it is lawfully discharged and redressed.
    Lord Ousely has already stated that HS2s consultation on compensation “was so unfair as to be unlawful”.
    HS2 ltd and the Government have yet to address this unlawful status other than to give an indication that it will re-run the consultation lawfully and produce as yet undetermined solution.
    Whilst not having effectively addressed and completed this this key matter which seems to me to breach thousands of householders rights under ECHR they are pushing ahead and extending the process before resolving this key issue..

    1) From HS2 Paving BIll
    Secretary Patrick McLoughlin has made the following statement under section
    19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998:

    (1)A Minister of the Crown in charge of a Bill in either House of Parliament must, before Second Reading of the Bill—
    (a)make a statement to the effect that in his view the provisions of the Bill are compatible with the Convention rights (“a statement of compatibility”);

    Yet the European Charter of Human Rights ARTICLE 8

    Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
    There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

    Hilary Wharf, Director, HS2AA on fair compensation
    “ No individual should have to bear a disproportionate share of the cost of HS2 by suffering personal loss in the value of their property, for a scheme the Government says is in the national interest”

    Case No: CO/3477/2012, CO/3467/2012, CO/3635/2012, CO/3605/2012 & CO/3732/2012
    Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
    Date: 15/03/2013
    Before :
    The consultation process in respect of blight and compensation was all in all so unfair as to be unlawful.

    It would seem that under the ECHR the matter of compensation and blight should have been addressed adequately as to be proper and lawful, yet when the Rt Hon Gillan sought to delay the 2nd reading of the Paving Bill on other significant grounds the response from the leader of the house was telling…………

    Mr Lansley replied:

    “I know how strongly you feel, not least on behalf of your constituents, in relation to this matter and I know you will be assiduous in examination of the legislation as it comes through.
    I will just remind you that the second reading of the High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill is exactly that, it is about enabling, giving Parliamentary authority, which I believe is actually the view of the official Opposition as well, that these projects should be enabled to go ahead. And the spending authority that the Bill provides will enable that to happen.
    I think given the importance that we all attach to this as a project for long-term economic growth in this country, I think it is important that the House proceeds on the basis that I have outlined.”

    Rt Hon Lansley suggests Parliaments wish is to push through and advance a project when the key issue of lawful compensation and blight have not been lawfully resolved.

  2. The MPs you need to persuade are out of the HS2 corridor too as this mega project reduces the money for all other requirements too. There is the need to persuade over half the MPs and these are outside the land take areas in the main by number. It is a numbers game now to persuade there are better investments than HS2 for only a few intercity connections. Even Mrs Ellman is alledged to have doubts that HS2 does not integrate into the Network Rail routes. The HS2 Route 3 swerving from London westward to Birmingham is an effective approach. Persuade MPs

    • Chris you are right they just carry on above the law of the land and waist even more of our money pushing this project along where is the sense .i do hope the law comes down on our side and puts a stop to hs2 keep up with the good work

Comments are closed.

2010-2023 © STOP HS2 – The national campaign against High Speed Rail 2