1. Speen Area Action Group High Speed 2 Presentation Mel Foster – Chair July 27 th 2010

2.  Covers Speen, Lacey Green, Loosely Row, North Dean, Gt. Hampden  Formal committee formed  HS2 microsite created at speenbucks.org.uk  HS2 Action Alliance affiliation  Registered for Bucks CC summit meetings  Working with Chiltern Society  Regular updates and campaign promotions  EXCEPTIONAL HARDSHIP SCHEME Speen Area Action Group

3.  New Government won’t carry through Labour’s plans  Even if it happens, it will not come here  It won’t really affect us  It’s in the National Interest Why all the fuss?

4.  New Government won’t carry through Labour’s plans  Sadly, not so – even more committed to high speed rail. More lines, faster implementation etc;  Believe it is part of a low-carbon strategy  Local MPs are gagged by Ministerial Code  Central policy dogma not questioning enough Why all the fuss?

5.  Even if it happens, it will not come here  Public consultation now scheduled for early 2011 on referred route  If this is rejected for any reason, another route can be chosen without further consultation. Why all the fuss?

6.  It won’t really affect us  It’s in the National Interest Why all the fuss?

7. HS2 Steve Rodrick, Chief Officer Presentation

8. The Chilterns Conservation Board  Set up by Parliament in 2004  To conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the Chilterns AONB  To promote understanding and enjoyment.  27 Board members  13 appointed by local authorities  8 elected by parish councils  6 appointed by the Secretary of State

10. Routes  Route 3  Amersham, Gt. Missenden, Wendover  ‘Preferred’ or recommended route  Route 2.5  Hughenden, North Dean, Lacey Green Horsenden, Haddenham  ‘Alternative preferred route’  Route 4  Colne Valley

11. Route 2.5 Lacey Grn - Horsenden

12. Route 2.5 tunnel exit - Horsenden

13. Route 2.5 near Haddenham

14. What does a high speed railway look like?

26. 7 – 10 years of construction  Road closures and congestion  Dust & dirt (do not hang washing out!)  40 tonne trucks all over the area  Noise and light pollution  Workers camps  5 mile wide construction zone

27. Noise “Some 21,300 dwellings could experience a noticeable increase in rail noise.” Vibration “An estimated 9,400 houses over tunnel sections could experience vibration impacts.”

28. It won’t really affect us?

29.  The CC Board does not believe that there is a proven case that it is in the national interest - economic or environmental  This view is widely shared: Chiltern Society, HS2AA, just about anyone who really studies the facts National Interest

30. Is a new railway needed?  Justification is based on a 267% increase in demand to 2033  Actual long distance demand has been static since 1995 –some modal shift from coaches  More realistic demand forecasts can be met from existing network  Virgin Pendolinos with extra carriages etc; could deliver a 65% increase in capacity  Chiltern Railways also has significant potential

31. Is a new railway needed?  Demand forecasts are always wrong:  Eurostar running at 50% of forecast  Recent WCML forecasts downgraded 5 times since 2005  High speed Javelin service from St. Pancras to Dover has already been cut due to lack of demand- after only 4 months in service  Current case takes no account of:  Impact of IT on communications vs travel  Cost pressure causing irreversible cuts in travel budgets

32.  A new railway will regenerate the regions  “..wider economic impacts are likely to be a relatively small part of the business case for HS2 at a national level.”  “.. The impact on national productivity is likely to be limited.”  “80% of journeys will be to London” Is a new railway needed?

33.  Currently showing a return on investment of 2.4  Based on unrealistic demand forecasts  Actual costs exceed revenues for stage 1 by £10 billion.  £28 billion benefit is ‘notional’ based on saving business travel time  £70k p.a. salary & non-productive on train The business case

34.  No ‘dis-benefits’ included in the case  Precedential damage to an AONB  Loss of amenity to countryside  Loss of property value  Damage to natural resources e.g. Chilterns Aquifer The business case

35. The Low Carbon Case  “The Government is committed to the establishment of a high speed rail network as part of its programme of measures to create a low carbon economy” P Hammond July 25 th  “The Government is committed to the establishment of a high speed rail network as part of its programme of measures to create a low carbon economy” P Hammond July 25 th  Emissions per passenger will be double what they are now on the West Coast Main Line.  They will double again if the trains run at 400 kph rather than 300pkh

36. The Low Carbon Case  At best the overall impact on carbon emissions will be neutral. (HS2)  That will depend upon significant introduction of renewable energy  No technological improvement in aviation / vehicle emissions technology

37. Will it end domestic UK flights?  “The total market for accessing Heathrow from the West Midlands, North West, North and Scotland is currently around 3.7 million trips. Our modelling suggests relatively little of this would shift to HS2.” n.b Current passenger throughput of Heathrow is 67 million per annum  “ Under any scenario the number of international passengers on HS2 is likely to be fairly limited”  Only 2% of motorway traffic will switch to HS2

38. Value for Money? Each minute saved on the journey between Birmingham and London will cost at least: £540,000,000

39.  New Government won’t carry through Labour’s plans  Even if it happens, it will not come here  It won’t really affect us  It’s in the National Interest Why all the fuss?

40. What you can do   Input to the Treasury CSR consultation  http://spendingchallenge.hm-treasury.gov.uk/ http://spendingchallenge.hm-treasury.gov.uk/   Write to your MP   Write to the Sec of State for Transport   Write to the Chancellor   Write to the PM   Write to all party leaders   Get involved

41. Questions