Political principles and democracy

Articles in today's Sunday Telegraph on the subject of HS2, one by Robert Watts and Adam Lusher, the other by Andrew Gilligan, illustrate the lack of political principle and democracy. Both articles are substantially shorter than those in the print edition - which raises a question about censorship on-line, but I digress. As a result some of the points I raise are from the print edition.


On the front page of the newspaper a short 'intro' article by Watts and Gilligan states that documents published last week revealed that 91 per cent of those consulted opposed the scheme. Yet Cheryl Gillan is quoted as stating that she appreciates that there are many people who remain disappointed - but, given there is overwhelming support in the House of Commons across all parties, she believes good progress has been made in improving the protection of the Chilterns. Yet another example of democratised dictatorship!


Justine Greening does not escape condemnation either, because if her views against the third runway at Heathrow are used then her reported statement by Gilligan, one made in 2009, that at every stage the Government has ignored public opinion and shamelessly ignored the grave environmental risk and that the battle to preserve our quality of life is important must also hold true today. But then, in 2009, Justine Greening was just an MP, which lends weight to the argument that attaining high office with all the benefits of position, power and an increased salary, does affect a politician's principles.


Just saying..........




Afterthought: A statement from Greening and link to all the documentation can be found here.

More HS2 Shenanighans

From PoliticsHome we learn that the Department for Transport have announced they have found an extra £500m which will be used to build a tunnel under the Chiltern Hills for the controversial HS2 train line. The extra funding means that a decision on HS2 will be delayed from this month to mid-January 2012, but is likely to assauge some of the opposition to the plans. The story is covered elsewhere here, here and here.

From the Guardian article we are informed that this extra £500m is to provide a further tunnel of 1.5 miles taken on the basis it would reduce aesthetic damage to the Chilterns, an area of outstanding natural beauty. From the Daily Telegraph we learn:

"The first six mile section to Old Oak Common Lane in northwest London is tunnelled before running over-ground to the M25, and then passing through another tunnel. This tunnel surfaces after Amersham for a mile, before entering a shorter tunnel, which ends at South Heath. The new cash will be used to join up the Amersham tunnel with the shorter tunnel."

And whose constitutuency is Chesham and Amersham? And who, besides David Lidington, has threatened to resign if HS2 crosses their constituency? Forgive me, but this decision 'stinks'! It reeks of public money being spent to save the government of the day very high profile resignation(s); and all the fall-out that that would entail.

We learn that Justine Greening is to delay any decision until January next year, although it is noted that she is due to appear before the Transport Select Committee on Wednesday 14th December at 17:05 hours. From the BBC suggestions have been made by the Campaign to Protect Rural England that the extra money has been found by possibly 'ungreening' (pun intended!) other sections of the line; and it is to be wondered whether Justine Greening will be forthcoming about such matters when she does appear before the Select Committee, assuming of course the question is asked, or whether she will make such details clear in her statement to the HoC.

In the recommendations of the last Transport Select Committee report it was noted that claims HS2 would deliver substantial carbon-reduction benefits did not stand up to scrutiny, although in the same paragraph the committee did note that HS2 will produce less carbon than an expanded motorway network or greater domestic aviation in the event of increased demand for inter-urban travel - so on the basis that all this 'carbon scam' is accepted, it presumably shows 'justification' for HS2. One other statement is worthy of mention and that is the Government needs to make clear how HS2 fits into its wider aviation strategy. Once again our politicians are being disingenious with the actualité because the government doesn't have a transport policy, aviation or otherwise; as the EU, by means of Article 4(g) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) can dictate any aspect of transport policy any time they so choose - and all our pretend government can do is, in effect, then implement any subsequent decision.

Whilst much is made by those against the scheme who have local concerns, it should also be noted that funding proposals have yet to be announced. Philip Hammond, when Transport Secretary, may well contend the project is affordable, yet at the end of the day we do not yet know how much liability there is for the taxpayer. In the letters column of today's Sunday Telegraph it is suggested that taxpayers will be liable for £10billion. (the Castles & Parish report referred to can be read here.) The 17 councils referred to are part of the 51m group, an alliance of councils opposed to HS2, so called because HS2 will costs every Parliamentary constituency £51m. Another matter worth ascertaining is, in discussing revenue that HS2 will produce, I do not see any inclusion to cater for the intention of the EU and their proposal that the 'user pays' concept.

It is also worth noting, if discussing disingeniousness, that in the Transport Committee report and the Castles & Parish paper, the 'EU element' of the Trans-European Network-Transport (TEN-T) appears most noticeable by its absence - but hey, the appearance of 'parliamentary sovereignty' understandably has to be 'maintained at all costs'. (again, pun intended)

As with just about any government 'project', what our political elite are doing with HS2 is spending money that is not theirs in the first place. Now, with 'Referism' and 'Direct Democracy' they would bloody well have to ask first!

"Useless Eustice" Group - Mark II?

The Guardian reports that there is a growing revolt amongst MPs across all parties, according to Dan Byles (Conservative: North Warwickshire), against HS2. The newspaper also reports something that has been known for some time, namely that Cheryl Gillan, secretary of state for Wales, MP for Chesham and Amersham, one of the affected constituencies, has pledged to defy the party whip and oppose the project - which would of course cost her ministerial position.

I have posted many times on the subject of HS2 (probably to the point of boredom), the last time being here, with various links, showing the connection to the Trans European Network (Transport) programme. That the likes of Byles, Gillan, Hurd and others apparently ignore, or are unaware of, the EU influence in the development of this line brings into question their suitability to hold the office they do.

Of course it would be remis not to pass comment on yet another shining example of what passes for journalism, namely the mere reporting of  of political spin without showing the slightest inclination to check the background. As Autonomous Mind posts, it would seem this newspaper is far more interested in preserving what is left of it's reputation than allow itself to report on a subject that both they and the political elite have decided is a non-subject (European Union and associated matters).

As with Useless Eustice and his collection of faux eurosceptics, so might this collection of rebels be being formed for the same purpose, namely to divert the public's attention, in this case from the real reason why the line is being built. That Cameron will not have spoken to Gillan, in view of her ministeral position, about her reported opposition cannot be in doubt, likewise that Gillan more than likely assured him it was just a case of 'keeping up appearances', with her in the starring role rather than Patricia Routledge.

That the faux-Conservative Party should have faux-eurosceptics and faux-antiHS2ers should come as 'faux' surprise to anyone.