Amersham Newsletter - 24th January 2014

  • HS2 Environmental Statement Consultation extended to 11.45 pm on 27th Feb.
  • Supreme Court Decision: HS2AA to pursue case in Europe
  • CPRE “reconsiders support” for HS2

HS2 Environmental Statement Consultation Extended to 11.45 pm on 27th Feb.

The House of Lords Standing Orders Committee has ruled that the HS2 Phase 1 Environmental Statement Consultation should be extended to 27th February. Their decision came less than a week after the equivalent House of Commons Committee ruled it should be extended to 10th February, from the original date of 24th January.
The extensions come as a result of HS2 Ltd omitting 877 pages from online and memory stick versions of the consultation documents.  The new deadline will push the date of the Second Reading of the HS2 Hybrid Bill back yet again: this is now  unlikely to happen before Easter. 
It is vital that everyone concerned about any aspect of HS2 responds to the consultation.  Our local action groups are finalising their responses to the consultation and you will be welcome to draw on any of the information which these contain.  We will let you know as soon as this information is available, in good time for the new deadline.

See this page for links to consultation documents for the AoNB

Supreme Court Ruling: HS2AA to pursue case in Europe

As supporters and contributors, we have all been following the progress through the courts of the legal challenge brought by HS2AA.   The Supreme Court finally handed down its decision this Wednesday, 21st January.  HS2AA issued the following press release.  Do take a moment to read it – this case is not over yet:  

HS2AA to pursue case in Europe following Supreme Court Decision to find in favour of the Government on HS2 SEA Appeal

“The Supreme Court today rejected HS2 Action Alliance’s (HS2AA) appeal that the Government should comply with the Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) Directive while planning HS2.

HS2AA considers that the Supreme Court’s restrictive interpretation of the SEA Directive is incorrect, and that its refusal to refer the matter to the European Court of Justice is in breach of its obligations under the EU Treaty.

As a result, HS2AA will bring a complaint to the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee because the Supreme Court’s restrictive approach is contrary to the Aarhus Convention. The Compliance Committee has the power to find that the Supreme Court’s decision leaves the UK in breach of their UN Treaty obligations under the Aarhus Convention - a binding international treaty designed to ensure that Governments develop infrastructure in an environmentally acceptable way.

HS2AA is also planning to bring a complaint to the European Commission. If this complaint is accepted, then the UK Government will be taken to the European Court of Justice to explain why it has not completed a Strategic Environmental Assessment for HS2. The European Court of Justice will then rule on the correctness of the Supreme Court’s decision.

HS2AA believes the Supreme Court adopted an unduly restrictive interpretation of the SEA Directive, holding that it only applies to infrastructure plans in very limited circumstances.

The consequence of today’s decision, is that the SEA Directive can never apply to infrastructure plans where a national Parliament grants the planning permission. The impact of this decision is that Governments can avoid laws designed to protect the environment by choosing to obtain planning permission from Parliament, rather than from an independent commission or inspector.

Despite the obvious EU-wide implications of this decision, the Supreme Court refused to refer the matter to the European Court of Justice for a definitive ruling.
It also implies the EU is in breach of its international obligations under the United Nations Aarhus Convention. The Convention requires the EU to have in place a regulatory framework for public participation in all plans relating to the environment, not just plans that are made under the limited circumstances that the Supreme Court says are subject to the Directive.

Commenting on the Supreme Court’s decision, Hilary Wharf, director, HS2 Action Alliance, said:
We always knew this would be a long fight. A number of the judges, led by Lady Hale, thought long and hard about whether the issues HS2AA raised should be referred to the European Court of Justice. This and the fact that we were given right to appeal to the highest court in the land shows how seriously the need for an SEA should be taken.”
We will continue to press the Government to meet its environmental obligations. The Government should be safeguarding our environment for future generations and the simple fact is HS2 is an unnecessary and hugely damaging project environmentally”
Without the support of thousands of people across the country we would not be able to press the Government to take its environmental responsibilities seriously. ”

CPRE Reconsiders Support for HS2

Members of the CPRE will be interested to read the News and Views item from their Chief Executive, posted on the website on 22nd January.  Headed “HS2: just another infrastructure project?” it says the CPRE is having “second thoughts” on HS2, as it is “increasingly hard” to see it “as any sort of green project.”  You’ll find the details here: http://cpreviewpoint.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/hs2-just-another-infrastructure-project/.