Last week a judge in the High Court ruled in favour of the Government’s proposed high-speed rail link project between London, Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds.
Out of 10 areas challenged by opposition campaigners, the Government received backing in nine, losing out only in a dispute over how the property compensation consultation was conducted.
Mr Justice Ouseley decreed that it was lawful for the Government to rule out upgrading the existing network as a credible alternative to the rail link, dubbed HS2, noting that a patch-and-mend approach fails to meet the Government’s objectives of providing a long-term boost to capacity and economic growth.
The 15 local authorities challenging the Secretary of State for Transport lost on all seven grounds of challenge they attempted, so the Government has said it will be seeking to recoup legal costs from the claimants.
Speaking after the ruling, high-speed rail minister Simon Burns said that it was a major, landmark victory for HS2 and the future of Britain allowing the Department of Transport to move forward as planned with the business of getting the scheme ready for construction in 2017, thereby delivering enormous benefits for the country.
Under the plans, speeds of up to 250mph on HS2 would reduce a Birmingham to Leeds journey from two hours to 57 minutes, while phase one will cut London-Birmingham travel to 49 minutes, from the current one hour and 24 minutes.
However, critics argue that HS2′s predicted economic benefits have been overestimated by the government, and suggest that the countryside will be blighted by the railway. The objections brought to court also included the claim that the government failed to adequately assess alternatives to the scheme.