The government has given the green light to plans for a high speed railway linking London and Birmingham, and branching off to Leeds and Manchester, although farming organisations, environmental groups and local communities along the route remain staunchly opposed to the plans.

 image expired

However, critics have said the link, which would intersect a large amount of agricultural land, is unnecessary and wasteful given its high cost at a time of austerity measures and the need to increase agricultural production. The scheme has also been criticised for using taxpayers' money to build a rail link that only the richest will be able to afford.

Opponents of HS2 have said the economic benefits have been overstated, the transport time estimates are “dubious” and the environmental case “does not stand up to scrutiny.” Emma Boon, spokesperson for the Taxpayers' Alliance, commented, "We can't afford £32 billion for this project right now. The business case is fundamentally flawed and the Government has vastly inflated the benefits of HSR to the regional economy while hiding the true costs of the project."

In a crushing indictment of the plans, a Countryside Alliance spokesperson said, “The impacts that cannot be monetised – damage to landscape and biodiversity – have yet to be seriously addressed by the Government and people who will feel these impacts most acutely are not being given a fair hearing.”

Transport secretary Justine Greening said, upon announcing the go ahead, that parts of the route would be tunneled to protect the surrounding countryside. The first phase of the building work will not be completed until 2026, with the rest estimated to be completed in the 2030s.

The HS2 decision also comes at a time when, due to forced cuts in spending, many local councils are withdrawing support for rural bus services, impacting on rural residents' ability to commute and the viability of rural businesses. Figures from the Countryside Alliance show that, on average, rural dwellers spend 24 per cent more on their commute than those in urban areas. The lobbying group said these costs are having an impact on the rural economy, which has been left to 'wither on the vine.'

Tweet