HS2 in Hansard 09/10/2013

5. Mr Elfyn Llwyd (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC):

What recent assessment he has made of the potential

costs and benefits of High Speed 2 to Wales. [900302]

The Secretary of State for Wales (Mr David Jones):

The Wales Office is committed to ensuringWales derives

the maximum possible benefit from HS2. In addition to

improved journey times and extra rail capacity that

passengers across the nation will experience,my Department

will be working closely with Lord Deighton’s HS2 growth

task force to identify further benefits to Wales.

Mr Llwyd: With respect, that is not a good answer

considering the Minister knew of this question three or

four weeks ago. Is there a robust cost-benefit analysis of

this whole fantastical project?

Mr Jones: The cost-benefit analysis indicates that

there will be a positive impact of £15 billion, in which

Wales will be a full participant.

Mr Llwyd: With some spending projections for this

vanity project topping £80 billion, will the Secretary of

State commit to fighting for a Barnett consequential

equivalent forWales, which could be between £3 billion

and £4 billion and make a huge difference to the Welsh

rail network?Will he join his predecessor, the right hon.

Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs Gillan), in

pleading this case, as reported today in the Western

Mail?

Mr Jones: I think the right hon. Gentleman knows

what my answer will be: HS2 is a UK-wide project from

which every part of the United Kingdom will benefit.

He is a northWales MP.He knows that northWales will

benefit from improved journey times to London via the

hub at Crewe, he knows that mid-Wales will benefit

from travel times via Birmingham, and he knows that

south Wales will benefit from connections at Old Oak

Common. Of course it will be of national benefit.

Stephen Mosley (City of Chester) (Con): Last week,

the Welsh Government announced the reopening of the

second line between Wrexham and Chester. Does my

right hon. Friend agree that such investment in rail

infrastructure, including HS2, has a massive role to play

in encouraging economic growth in north-east Wales

and west Cheshire?

Mr Jones:Yes. I was pleased that theWelsh Government

reversed their decision not to redouble the line between

Chester and Wrexham. It plays an important part in the

business case for north Wales electrification, which I am

sure all Members would welcome.

14. [900311] Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab): The £44 million

of Labour investment in the Wrexham-Chester line is

not a reversal of the decision; it is part of continued

investment to improve the network in north-east Wales.

I know the right hon. Gentleman is interested in this

issue. Will he meet me to explore specifically how HS2

will link to the new development in the rail network in

north-east Wales to benefit the area?

Mr Jones: The hon. Gentleman knows that I am

always delighted to meet him to discuss rail matters. In

fact, I invited him to a meeting only a few months ago

to discuss the electrification of the Wrexham to Bidston

line. I am entirely happy to keep meeting him.

Stuart Andrew (Pudsey) (Con): Is there not a real

danger that the economies of north Wales and northern

England could be left behind if we rely solely on the

existing north-south rail lines, which, by all predictions,

will be full to capacity by the mid-2020s?

Mr Jones: My hon. Friend is entirely right: it is a

question not just of speed, but of capacity. In his area,

journey times from Leeds to London will be reduced by

about 60 minutes, which I am sure we would all welcome.

High Speed 2

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

if he will (a) publish his most recent remit letter of HS2

Ltd and (b) the Memorandum of Articles of Association

of HS2 Ltd, indicating where amendments have been

made to ensure compatibility with that remit letter.

[168572]

Mr McLoughlin: The information is as follows:

The Memorandum and Articles of Association

of High Speed 2 (HS2) Ltd are publicly available and

filed at Companies House. These documentswere reviewed

in light of the new remit letter and it was considered

that they did not need to be changed.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

what progress has been made on the recruitment of

non-executive directors with specialist expertise in finance

and communication to the board of HS2 Ltd. [168541]

Mr McLoughlin: The Department is in the process of

appointing an executive search consultant to manage

the recruitment of the two non-executive directors for

theHS2Ltd Board. Once that is concluded, the Department

will work with the consultants to get the posts publicly

advertised, which we aim to do in the next few weeks.

High Speed 2 Railway Line

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

how much has been paid from the public purse to (a)

Arup Group, (b) Balfour Beatty, (c) Kier Group, (d)

Laing O’Rourke, (e) Mott MacDonald Group, (f)

Skanska UK, (g) Dialogue by Design, (h) Capita

Symonds Ineco JV, (i) Parsons Brinckerhoff, (j) URS

Scott Wilson, (k) the ERM Temple Group Mott

MacDonald Consortium, (l) TerraQuest, (m) Mouchell

and (n) KPMG for contracts related to High Speed 2

since May 2010; and how much remains to be paid to

each company under uncompleted contracts. [168540]

Mr McLoughlin: The information is as follows:

HS2 Limited
Supplier Spend May 2010 to date Contracted further spend
Arup Group 63,361,045.93 12,658,471.36
Balfour Beatty 0 0
Kier Group 0 0
Laing O’Rourke 0 0
MOTT MacDonald 25,543,115.44 6,720,391.52
Skansaka UK 0 0
Dialogue By Design 472,589.25 974,689.65
Capita Symonds Ineco JV 17,555,150.01 1,360,940.79
Parsons Brinckerhoff 11,538,088.82 794,264.78
URS Scott Wilson 53,304.60 0
The ERM Temple Group MOTT
MacDonald Consortium
24,946,423.17 3,058,093.23
TerraQuest 1,654,103.81 290,418.37
Mouchel 1,236,792.12 120,400.88
KMPG 2,129,039.46 101,786.54
Total 148,489,652.61 26,079,457.12
DFT
Spend May 2010 to date Contracted further spend
Parsons Brinckerhoff            1,400,000                   0

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

whether his Department will revise construction cost

estimates for High Speed 2 to include payment for VAT

by HS2 Ltd. [168544]

Mr McLoughlin: Spending round 2013 set a long-term

budget for delivery of HS2 of £42.6 billion (2011 prices).

This includes contingency provision of £14.4 billion.

As the NAO pointed out in May, VAT

’is an internal transfer within government rather than an

additional cost’.

It would therefore not be right to include VAT within

construction cost estimates.

In order to recover VAT incurred on the costs of

constructing the railway, HS2 Ltd will have to register

for VAT. To do so, it will have to satisfy HMRC that it

191W Written Answers 8 OCTOBER 2013 Written Answers 192W

intends to make taxable supplies, as explained in

paragraph 3.12 of the May 2013 National Audit Office

report.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

whether his Department plans to issue a revised business

case for High Speed 2 before the hybrid Bill for phase

one of the scheme is deposited in Parliament. [168560]

Mr McLoughlin: The Department is currently revising

the business case to take account of the latest available

evidence and understanding of the project. TheGovernment

plans to issue the latest case for the scheme to support

the deposit of the hybrid Bill for phase one later this

year.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

whether the High Speed 2 community forums will meet

after the date of deposit in Parliament of the hybrid Bill

for phase one of High Speed 2. [168561]

Mr McLoughlin: Once the hybrid Bill for phase one

of High Speed 2 has been deposited in Parliament, the

main focus of HS2 Ltd’s work will be on supporting the

parliamentary process, including engaging with those

who petition Parliament regarding the Bill. In parallel,

HS2 Ltd is committed to keeping open lines of

communication with communities along the route, and

will be discussing with those communities the best

means of doing so, both through the round of forums

now underway and through other engagement channels.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

whether HS2 Ltd plans to hold local information events

during the consultation on the environmental statement

for phase one of the High Speed 2 scheme. [168562]

Mr McLoughlin: The consultation on the environmental

statement for HS2 phase one that will follow the deposit

of the hybrid Bill, is required by parliamentary standing

orders. The purpose of the consultation is to ensure that

Parliament is informed of people’s view on the

environmental impact of the scheme to allow Parliament

to consider this as part of its deliberations on the

forthcoming hybrid Bill. Standing orders do not require

local information events and as such HS2 Ltd are not

planning to hold any.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

if he will publish the report from the Audit and Risk

Management Committee presented at the board meeting

of HS2 Ltd on 18 July 2013. [168569]

Mr McLoughlin: The update from the Audit and

Risk Management Committee was given verbally at the

meeting. HS2 Ltd does not hold a written report.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

what the cost to the public purse is of holding the

September HS2 Ltd board meeting in Liverpool.

[168570]

Mr McLoughlin: HS2 Ltd held its September 2013

board meeting in Liverpool and used the opportunity

to meet with key stakeholders, avoiding costs that would

otherwise have been incurred for separate meetings.

The cost of holding this meeting was £4,125.50 and

spending was within HS2 Ltd expense limits as set out

in our policies.

HS2 Ltd does not have access to costs incurred by

third parties such as Merseytravel.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

what the cost to the public purse was of holding the July

board meeting of HS2 Ltd hosted by Sir Albert Bore

and Birmingham city council. [168571]

Mr McLoughlin: HS2 Ltd held its July 2013 board

meeting in Birmingham and used the opportunity to

meet with key stakeholders, avoiding costs that would

otherwise have been incurred for separate meetings.

The cost of holding this meeting was £3,181.33 and

spending was within HS2 Ltd expense limits as set out

in HS2 Ltd’s policies.

HS2 Ltd does not have access to costs incurred by

third parties such as Birmingham city council.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

if he will list the panel of experts who peer reviewed the

KPMGreport into High Speed 2; and what (a) interests

they declared and (b) remuneration they received for

their work. [169276]

Mr McLoughlin: The panel of experts who peer

reviewed the work were:

Bridget Rosewell—Volterra

Chris Nash—ITS Leeds

David Simmonds—David Simmonds Consultancy

David Tuck—GENECON

Paul Buchanan—SKM Colin Buchanan

Rob Colley—Deloitte

Roger Vickerman—University of Kent

Tony Venables—University of Oxford

(a) One of the members of the panel declared a

pre-existing contract with a county council to implement

and test an extension to a country wide economic

model which assesses the effects of changes outside the

local area on the local economy and hence on local land

uses and transport systems.

(b) The cost of the peer review was £13,858 inclusive

of VAT.

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport how much was paid to KPMG for the report

on the regional economic effects of High Speed 2.

[169377]

Mr McLoughlin: The amount paid to KPMG was

£242,126 inclusive of VAT.

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport howmuchwas paid to thosewho peer-reviewed

KPMG’s work on the regional economic effects of

High Speed 2. [169378]

Mr McLoughlin: The total cost of the peer review

was £13,858 inclusive of VAT.

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport which items were included in the original

estimate of £1.2 billion for the full scale works at

Euston for High Speed 2; and what changes to this

figure contributed to the revised cost of £2 billion for

this work. [169379]

193W Written Answers 8 OCTOBER 2013 Written Answers 194W

Mr McLoughlin: The £1.2 billion estimate was a

pre-feasibility concept estimate that included the assumed

works to the station and civil engineering in the throat.

The items contributing to the revised cost of £2 billion

include additional civil works; additional station and

passenger facilities; emergency and safety measures;

enhanced Transport for London (London Underground)

requirements; increased urban realmworks; and allowance

for railway systems.

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport which items were included in the original

estimate of £1.6 billion for the reduced High Speed 2

Scheme at Euston. [169380]

Mr McLoughlin: The items included in the estimate

of £1.6 billion for the current, modified High Speed 2

Scheme at Euston include the station works associated

with High Speed 2, Network Rail and Transport for

London works to the underground station. The estimate

is also inclusive of the civil engineering works in the

approach to the station.

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport if he will publish all communications between

his Department and KPMG (a) before and (b) during

KPMG’s assessment of the regional economic effects of

High Speed 2. [169381]

MrMcLoughlin: The Department did notcommunicate

directly with KPMG during their assessment. The work

was commissioned and managed by HS2 Ltd. The

Department provided comments on a draft of the document

for consideration by the review panel established by

HS2 Ltd to provide critical feedback to KPMG.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

if he will publish the remit and all commissioning

documents and instructions given to KPMG in advance

of its production of its recent report into High Speed 2;

what fee hisDepartment has paid toKPMGfor production

of that report; andwhen that reportwas first commissioned.

[169382]

Mr McLoughlin: The recent KPMG report on HS2

was commissioned by HS2 Ltd, not the Department for

Transport. In the interest of transparency we have

placed the Tender document in the Libraries of the

House. The report was commissioned by HS2 Ltd on

22 March 2013 and the contract was awarded on 24April

2013. The final fee for the report, as invoiced byKPMG,

was £242,125.90 including VAT.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport

whether a decision has yet been taken on the distance

applied to the property bond option currently being

consulted on by his Department; and what consideration

he has given to whether such a bond could be applied to

affected properties more than 120 metres away from the

High Speed 2 line used in the Deloitte report on the

property bond design for High Speed 2 affected properties.

[169646]

Mr McLoughlin: TheGovernment is currently consulting

on proposals for property compensation schemes along

the phase one line of route. It would be inappropriate

for me to comment further at this stage.

High Speed 2 Railway Line

Gloria De Piero: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport what steps he is taking to protect Grade I

and Grade II listed buildings during the construction

of High Speed 2. [169044]

Mr McLoughlin: HS2 Ltd has sought to avoid direct

impacts on all heritage assets during the route selection

process. No grade I or II* listed buildings are currently

directly physically affected by either phase of the proposed

HS2 route.

With the current proposed scheme for phase 2, eight

grade II listed structures would be directly impacted

although, with detailed design, preservation may be

possible for some of the structures.

Andrew Bridgen: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport what amount was paid by HS2 Ltd to

KPMG for its report, HS2 Regional Economic

Impacts, published in September 2013. [169291]

Mr McLoughlin: The amount paid to KPMG was

£242,126 inclusive of VAT.

Frank Dobson: To ask the Secretary of State for

Transport whether the cost of chassis-compatible High

Speed 2 trains is included in the current published

estimate for the cost of High Speed 2 rolling stock.

Mr McLoughlin: The cost of the classic-compatible

High Speed 2 trains is included in the current published

estimate for the cost of High Speed 2 rolling stock.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/chan52.pdf

Advertisements