Agenda item

Report of the Director of Services

Presented by the Regeneration and Planning Portfolio Holder

Having declared a pecuniary interest, Councillors R Blunt, J G Coxon and T J Pendleton left the meeting prior to consideration of the subsequent item and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

Councillor A V Smith presented the report to members on behalf of Councillor T J Pendleton.  She made reference to the current consultation on the proposed changes to the HS2 route in the district.  She reminded members that the Council had previously resolved the object to the route in 2014 on the basis that the district would be negatively impacted without any real gain.  She advised that it was now suggested that the Council should no longer object outright to the project, but instead offer qualified support recognising the significant economical potential generated by the HS2 project.  She outlined the potential benefits including better journey times allowing for much improved business and employment links between towns and cities, increased capacity on the existing network leading to improved train services, opportunities for more economic development, particularly around East Midlands Airport and opportunities to develop improved transport networks linked to HS2 hubs.  She emphasised however that concerns remained, which were set out clearly in the documents appended to the report.  She summarised the concerns as follows:

The logic of no longer proposing a tunnel under East Midlands Airport was acknowledged, however Kegworth would need to be compensated for the lack of recreation space and the delivery of the Kegworth bypass should not be put at risk.

The lack of a station in the district was disappointing and an opportunity had been missed to link closer to East Midlands Airport or the Parkway station.

The proposed route change to run the line to the east of Measham would have a severe detrimental impact upon the villages of Appleby, Measham and Packington and a route should be sought which protected important jobs within the district but avoided the negative impacts of the eastern route around Measham.

Councillor A V Smith commented that whatever route was eventually decided upon, HS2 was coming to the district and the Council had an important role to play in supporting communities and businesses affected by the proposals.  She reiterated the importance of making the most of the benefits that HS2 would bring to the district, but also ensuring that HS2 heard the voice of our communities.

Councillor S Sheahan proposed an amendment to the motion which was circulated at the meeting.  He stated that since the Council published its report a lot of people had written in and some of them were present at the meeting.  He added that much of what they had written was informative and well written.  He stated that the amendment sought to ensure the Council could give the strongest possible response to HS2.  He made reference to a piece of work which had been undertaken in respect of employment which he felt should be included and some figures released by Leicestershire County Council in respect of the number of houses affected by the proposals.  He urged members to make use of this information and ensure the Council’s consultation response was as strong as it could be.

The amendment was seconded by Councillor J Geary who reserved his comments. 

Councillor A V Smith commented that members needed to see the information before they could agree to include it.  She urged members to vote against the amendment.

Councillor J Legrys expressed bitter disappointment that an agreement could not have been reached in respect of the amendment which sought to address concerns in respect of the wording of the recommendations. 

Councillor S Sheahan made a point of clarification and commented that this issue of members not having seen the representations before agreeing to their inclusion in the consultation response could be resolved by delegating authority to the Director of Services in consultation with the Portfolio Holder.  He requested a short adjournment to consider this and see if an agreement could be reached.  He expressed concerns that local people were being shut out.

It was not agreed to adjourn the meeting. 

Councillor J Geary expressed bitter disappointment as he felt the amendment would strengthen the recommendations.  He commented that surely adding weight to the case could only be positive. 

The Chairman then put the amendment to the vote.  The amendment was declared LOST.

The Chairman directed members to the substantive motion as set out in the agenda. 

Councillor S Sheahan expressed concern in the change in stance from opposing HS2 to supporting it.  He commented that HS2 was not inevitable and he felt the business case was flawed being based on unproven journey saving times.  He added that councils and other bodies who had changed their stance had heavily caveated their support with conditions relating to connectivity to cities, which was the Achilles heel of HS2 in the East Midlands.  He highlighted the risk of losing valuable custom to the East Midlands mainline.  He felt that the benefits were questionable and when weighed against the impacts on schools and jobs, would result in a disbenefit to the district.

Councillor T Eynon stated that she was broadly supportive of the attempt to mitigate the adverse effects on North West Leicestershire and the strategy document.  She believed that the concerns of local residents should be taken into account and the benefits to Coalville had been overstated.  She expressed concerns that public transport times would increase.

Councillor N Smith stated that he was totally opposed to HS2 and the impact it would have upon Packington, as the proposals would cause untold harm and were already causing problems.  He commented that to suggest people were not being listened to was wrong, as there was a mechanism in place whereby people could express their views.  He concluded that he would support the recommendations as he felt this was the way forward.

Councillor D Harrison welcomed the comprehensive assessment and concurred with the concerns set out in the report.  He accepted the potential benefits and welcomed economic development however he expressed concerns in respect of the impact particularly on Ashby de la Zouch, Packington and Measham.  He commented that if the proposed route was pushed through, it was clear the people of Appleby would be paying a very heavy price.  He added that one of the fundamental principles of HS2 had been wherever possible to follow existing corridors and he questioned why this principle had not been followed in North West Leicestershire.

Councillor J Clarke stated that initially he was totally opposed to HS2 and commented that never in the field of public transport would so much money have been spent to benefit so few.  He added that the villages and people whose lives would be blighted forever would be the ones who paid the price.  He hoped that the proposals would not proceed and felt that the timings suggested were neither relevant nor sustainable. 

Councillor G Hoult stated that she was pleased to see the report did not support the proposal to move the line east of Measham as there were no benefits to the village.  She commented that the proposed route would blight Measham by going against HS2’s own rules and making an island of the village.  She added that the proposals were already causing confusion and distress to residents and HS2 needed to find an alternative route that did not have such a detrimental impact upon the area.

Councillor T Gillard stated that it had been implied that the Council was supporting HS2.  He clarified that this was not the case and referred members to the recommendations set out in the report. 

Councillor M Specht added that members were voting for or against the recommendation on page 100 of the agenda, and not the proposed route

Councillor S Sheahan commented that the recommendation was to adopt the strategy which stated that the Council was broadly in support of the concept of HS2.

Councillor A V Smith thanked members for their comments and drew their attention to the bullet points on page 102 of the agenda which addressed the points made. 

It was moved by Councillor A V Smith, seconded by Councillor R D Bayliss and

RESOLVED THAT:

a)      The HS2 strategy for the district appended to this report be agreed;

b)      Officers be authorised to negotiate with HS2 ltd to maximise the local             benefits arising from HS2 including improving connectivity from the   district to the HS2 stations;

c)      The response to the HS2 consultation as appended to this report be   agreed and the Director of Services be authorised to submit the        comments as the Council’s official response to the HS2 consultation;

d)         The Council’s proactive role in seeking to support businesses and   residents across the district who may be affected by the HS2   proposals be supported