High Speed Rail - Transport Committee Contents

Written evidence from Cheryl Gillan MP (HSR 97)


My constituency is on the proposed route for HS2 and should the consultation result in a decision to proceed with the route it would be very seriously affected.

Many of my constituents have directly submitted views to the consultation, but they would like you to consider in your examination of the HS2 proposals the alternative routes which do not appear to have had full scrutiny. In particular, the route proposed by Arup, which follows to a greater degree the M1 transport corridor, and the route that offers better alignment with and connectivity to the

West Country. I understand the "Ml Route" gives far better connectivity to a greater number of northern towns and cities. They would also like you to examine the connectivity between the proposed HS2 route and Crossrail, Heathrow and HS1.

I understand that the development and discussion of alternative routes are subject to non-disclosure agreements, but it would be helpful to my constituents if you examined whether this is the case.

In addition, I am attaching two documents concerning Arup and BAA that were brought to my attention by a constituent.[288] I understand that these documents are now in the government's archives and certain passages and diagrams on some of the pages have been blanked out. The Arup report blanking is easy to find, however the BAA (Heathrow) report is page 24 (or PDF page 36). I understand that the areas blanked out may possibly relate to the cost saving of £400 million and damage limitation to the Chilterns AONB. I should be grateful if the Transport Select Committee would examine this further.

16 May 2011

288   BAA and Arup submissions to Lord Mawhinney's review. Not printed with this submission Back

previous page contents next page

© Parliamentary copyright 2011
Prepared 8 November 2011