Agenda item

This Council notes the publication of the Draft Environmental Statement of HS2 Phase 2b. In particular, it recognises the significant impact that construction activity associated with the project will have on the communities of Woodlesford, Oulton, Rothwell, Swillington and Methley between 2024 to 2032. This will involve considerable restriction of liberty, highway closure and reconstruction, disruption to bus and rail services, prohibition of access to parks and green spaces, congestion and severe trading conditions for local businesses.

This Council does not believe that the above potentially disastrous effects of sustained disruption on workers, students and families in these communities is a “price worth paying” for the regeneration of the Leeds South Bank that the Council hopes to achieve through investment related to the proposed HS2 terminus.

Council also notes the already escalating cost of the HS2 project, almost doubling to current estimates of £56 billion, and the resulting pressure to limit compensation and mitigation costs en route.

This Council therefore calls on all Leeds MPs to support Ed Milliband MP’s call for a “proper examination and inquiry” into HS2, including a Select Committee hearing.

This Council further calls on the ruling administration to carry out an economic and social impact forecast study on the communities affected by proposed HS2 construction, with published recommendations as to what it considers would be the appropriate type, level and quality of mitigation that this Council would expect HS2 to deliver for those communities, in anticipation of the Environmental Statement which accompanies the future Hybrid Bill.

It was moved by Councillor C Harrison, seconded by Councillor Golton that this Council notes the publication of the Draft Environmental Statement of HS2 Phase 2b. In particular, it recognises the significant impact that construction activity associated with the project will have on the communities of Woodlesford, Oulton, Rothwell, Swillington and Methley between 2024 to 2032. This will involve considerable restriction of liberty, highway closure and reconstruction, disruption to bus and rail services, prohibition of access to parks and green spaces, congestion and severe trading conditions for local businesses.

This Council does not believe that the above potentially disastrous effects of sustained disruption on workers, students and families in these communities is a “price worth paying” for the regeneration of the Leeds South Bank that the Council hopes to achieve through investment related to the proposed HS2 terminus.

Council also notes the already escalating cost of the HS2 project, almost doubling to current estimates of £56 billion, and the resulting pressure to limit compensation and mitigation costs en route.

This Council therefore calls on all Leeds MPs to support Ed Milliband MP’s call for a “proper examination and inquiry” into HS2, including a Select Committee hearing.

This Council further calls on the ruling administration to carry out an economic and social impact forecast study on the communities affected by proposed HS2 construction, with published recommendations as to what it considers would be the appropriate type, level and quality of mitigation that this Council would expect HS2 to deliver for those communities, in anticipation of the Environmental Statement which accompanies the future Hybrid Bill.

An amendment was moved by Councillor Buckley, seconded by Councillor Stephenson

Delete all after “This Council” and replace with:

“is aware of the significant potential benefits HS2 will bring to the city that will enable major transformation of the city’s Southbank, delivery of a new transport hub that will also support HS3 and the potential for thousands of new jobs in Leeds.  Council is also aware of the support of the Chamber of Commerce and wider business community for HS2 in Leeds, but recognises the significant impact that construction activity associated with the project will have on the communities of Woodlesford, Oulton, Rothwell, Swillington, Garforth, Aberford, Micklefield and Methley between 2024 to 2032.

“Council notes that the proposed configuration of the HS2 terminus in Leeds is a major cause of route disruption in the towns and villages noted above. This Council welcomes that the MP for Elmet and Rothwell has written to the Labour Chair of the Transport Select Committee asking for any Select Committee inquiry into HS2 to include the role of the Council in deciding the configuration of the proposed HS2 terminus. Council further notes that the Labour Chair of the Committee has so far indicated no support for such an inquiry. 

“This Council calls on the ruling administration to carry out an economic and social impact forecast study on the communities affected by proposed HS2 construction, with published recommendations as to what it considers would be the appropriate type, level and quality of mitigation that this Council would expect HS2 to deliver for those communities, in anticipation of the Environmental Statement which accompanies the future Hybrid Bill.”

A second amendment was moved by Councillor R Lewis, seconded by Councillor Bruce

Delete all after “This Council” and replace with:

“… believes it is important to continue to robustly challenge HS2 to ensure the concerns of local residents are fully taken into account during construction, as the Council has done in its response to the publication of the Draft Environmental Statement of HS2 Phase 2b. Council will continue to demand that HS2 support communities affected by proposed HS2 construction.

This Council notes that HS2 was a scheme instigated by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government and one that MPs retained all decision making powers over in parliament. Council therefore calls for the Government to ensure an appropriate parliamentary examination and inquiry into HS2 Phase 2B.  Any inquiry should cover the former Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s role in determining the route of HS2 through Leeds, as well as whether the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government has met this Council’s previous call for the Government to protect existing communities threatened by the route and to provide fair and equitable compensation for Leeds residents.

This Council remains extremely concerned by the chaos regularly faced by passengers on the Northern and Trans-Pennine rail franchises which were put in place by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government and believes the best way to improve services is to return the rail network to public ownership as soon as possible.”

The amendment in the name of Councillor Buckley was declared lost and the second amendment in the name of Councillor R Lewis was carried and upon being put to the vote it was

RESOLVED – That this Council believes it is important to continue to robustly challenge HS2 to ensure the concerns of local residents are fully taken into account during construction, as the Council has done in its response to the publication of the Draft Environmental Statement of HS2 Phase 2b. Council will continue to demand that HS2 support communities affected by proposed HS2 construction.

This Council notes that HS2 was a scheme instigated by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government and one that MPs retained all decision making powers over in parliament. Council therefore calls for the Government to ensure an appropriate parliamentary examination and inquiry into HS2 Phase 2B.  Any inquiry should cover the former Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s role in determining the route of HS2 through Leeds, as well as whether the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government has met this Council’s previous call for the Government to protect existing communities threatened by the route and to provide fair and equitable compensation for Leeds residents.

This Council remains extremely concerned by the chaos regularly faced by passengers on the Northern and Trans-Pennine rail franchises which were put in place by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government and believes the best way to improve services is to return the rail network to public ownership as soon as possible.”

On the requisition of Councillor Cohen and Councillor Robinson the voting on the amendments and the substantive motion was recorded as follows;

The amendment in the name of Councillor Buckley

YES – 16

B Anderson, C Anderson, Buckley, Cohen, Flynn, Harrand, Harrington, M Harrison, Lamb, P Latty, Robinson, Seary, Shemilt, Stephenson, J Taylor and Wadsworth.

NO – 67

Akhtar, Almas, Arif, Bithell, A Blackburn, D Blackburn, Blake, Brooks, Bruce, Carlill, Charlwood, Coupar, Dawson, Dowson,  Drinkwater, Dye, Elliott, Field, Gabriel, Garner, Garthwaite, J Gibson, M Gibson, Goddard, P Grahame, R Grahame, Groves, C Gruen, P Gruen, Hamilton, Harland, Harper, Hayden, Heselwood, Hussain, Illingworth, Iqbal, Jenkins, Khan, Knight, Leadley, Lennox, J Lewis, R Lewis, Lowe, Lyons, Maqsood, McCormack, McKenna, Mulherin,  Nash, Pryor, Rafique, Ragan, Renshaw, Ritchie, Scopes, Shahzad, Smart, E Taylor, Truswell, Tunnicliffe, Venner, Wakefield, Walshaw, Wenham and Wray.

ABSTAIN – 4

Bentley, Dobson, Golton and Kidger.

The amendment in the name of Councillor R Lewis

YES – 61

Akhtar, Almas, Arif, Bithell, Blake, Brooks, Bruce, Carlill, Charlwood, Coupar, Dawson, Dowson,  Drinkwater, Dye, Gabriel, Garner, Garthwaite, J Gibson, M Gibson, Goddard, P Grahame, R Grahame, Groves, C Gruen, P Gruen, Hamilton, Harland, Harper, Hayden, Heselwood, Hussain, Illingworth, Iqbal, Jenkins, Khan, Knight, Lennox, J Lewis, R Lewis, Lowe, Lyons, Maqsood, McKenna, Mulherin,  Nash, Pryor, Rafique, Ragan, Renshaw, Ritchie, Scopes, Shahzad, Smart, E Taylor, Truswell, Tunnicliffe, Venner, Wakefield, Walshaw, Wenham and Wray.

NO – 25

B Anderson, C Anderson, Bentley, Buckley, Cohen, Dobson, Downes, Field, Flynn, Golton, Harrand, Harrington, C Harrison, M Harrison, Lamb, P Latty, Lay, Leadley, McCormack, Robinson, Seary, Shemilt, Stephenson, J Taylor and Wadsworth.

ABSTAIN – 4

A Blackburn, D Blackburn, Elliott and Kidger.

The Substantive Motion in the name of Councillor R Lewis

YES – 61

Akhtar, Almas, Arif, Bithell, Blake, Brooks, Bruce, Carlill, Charlwood, Coupar, Dawson, Dowson,  Drinkwater, Dye, Gabriel, Garner, Garthwaite, J Gibson, M Gibson, Goddard, P Grahame, R Grahame, Groves, C Gruen, P Gruen, Hamilton, Harland, Harper, Hayden, Heselwood, Hussain, Illingworth, Iqbal, Jenkins, Khan, Knight, Lennox, J Lewis, R Lewis, Lowe, Lyons, Maqsood, McKenna, Mulherin,  Nash, Pryor, Rafique, Ragan, Renshaw, Ritchie, Scopes, Shahzad, Smart, E Taylor, Truswell, Tunnicliffe, Venner, Wakefield, Walshaw, Wenham and Wray.

NO – 25

B Anderson, C Anderson, Bentley, Buckley, Cohen, Dobson, Downes, Field,  Flynn ,Golton, Harrand, Harrington, C Harrison, M Harrison, Kidger, Lamb, P Latty, Leadley, McCormack, Robinson, Seary, Shemilt, Stephenson, J Taylor and Wadsworth.

ABSTAIN – 3

A Blackburn, D Blackburn and Elliott.