Proceeding contribution from Geoffrey Robinson (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 31 March 2011. It occurred during Adjournment debate and Backbench debate on High-Speed Rail.
High-Speed Rail
I am grateful to the Minister. I hope that we can take that assurance at face value, as we are meant to. The test will be whether the Department is prepared objectively to get into the detail of RP2, because it has not done so yet. The Government should just study the papers produced by the HS2 Action Alliance and look at where they have tried to conflate a whole set of different alternatives. The Government and the Department—not the Minister, of course—should look at where they have tried to obfuscate the obvious advantages of RP2. From being 25% of the capital cost of HS2, RP2 has suddenly become 50%. That is all about the sudden increase in the cost of the rolling stock for RP2. Why has that happened? Can the Minister answer that basic question? After all, the Government say that they have studied this objectively.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 526 c158-9WH
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Construction Finance Environment protection Forecasts Railways Passengers High Speed Two High Speed 2 line High Speed Two Action Alliance
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 22:00:40 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_733254
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_733254
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_733254