Stop HS2 protesters in Lichfield

Don’t miss out!

Get all the most important news and events to your inbox.

Protect our independence - donate now


Your contribution is appreciated.

Our non-for-profit, independent community journalism is produced by volunteers and survives thanks to your regular contributions.

Lichfield’s MP has made a fresh call for a rethink on the controversial HS2 scheme in the wake of a new report on the possible location of a new airport runway in the south-east. Michael Fabricant’s comments come on the back of Sir Howard Davies’ study into air traffic capacity in the south-east.
Michael Fabricant MP
And he insisted that the future of the UK’s transport infrastructure needed to be considered as a whole. “It makes no sense to construct HS2 if it doesn’t directly link with wherever will be London’s main airport,” Mr Fabricant said. “The route of HS2 is flawed – even some senior executives at HS2 now admit this. “It is several billion pounds more expensive than it need be and it could be less environmentally damaging by using existing transport corridors now that it will no longer run at ultra high speeds. Yet the Government blindly presses on regardless.” However, his suggestion met a brick wall in the shape of Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin who said the Government was “committed to that route”.


Founder of Lichfield Live and editor of the site.

4 replies on “Lichfield MP makes fresh call for rethink on ‘flawed’ HS2 route”

  1. Lichfield MP still flying a proverbial kite, hoping to move the problem of HS2 into someone else’s backyard – or in his case, another MP’s constituency. I agree, the budget for HS2 does require some serious scrutiny – perhaps you’d like to recommend that Sir David Higgins (new boss of HS2 project) instructs his team to take a look at the three currently under construction High Speed Rail projects on the other side of La Manche; LGV SEA, LGV Bretagne and LGV Est phase II – these projects amount to 676km of new High Speed Rail trackway and associated links, with a total cost of £12bn all-in – compare that with HS2’s (phase I & II) 590km, currently budgeted anywhere between £28bn – £42bn?!? Something is wrong there alright – HS2’s total cost should be coming in at around £20bn all in, even accounting for extra tunnelling, Euston’s makeover as a London terminus and the higher pro-rata cost of land in the UK? The route itself is not flawed; the engineers have made the best of their constrained brief and managed to avoid all major areas of built up property – the line has to go somewhere Michael and your constituency just happens to be the best candidate!

  2. The topology and geology and rivers/flood plains are drving higher costs as is the need to accomodate the 225/250mph speed. The route is flawed because it does not serve any population base between London and Birmingham so the short haul fare box is not contributing. Central Buckinghamshire was not the choise of a constrained brief but the direct alignment through Calvert for the IMD. Adding additional tunnels and cuttings for 4 tracks instead of the 2 tracks which is possible in most safeguarded sections doubles the heavy civil costs of circa £5B and for the remainder add 50% of the per mile/kilometre costs eg £8B a total addition of £13B to the £17B Grand total for a commuter and intercity resilient route of £30Billion for phase 1. This cannot be justified on the current route through rural counties. Rt Hon Michael Fabricant is correct Route 3 is flawed and the concept of 5 intercity connections is also flawed for phase1. Thank you

Comments are closed.