 |
answer text |
<p>The Wendover Mined Tunnel was considered in detail during the passage of the Phase
One Bill in both the Commons and Lords committees. Cost comparisons of the consented
scheme and the tunnelled alternatives were considered in evidence to both committees
during the Bill process and the primary conclusion was that the now consented scheme
would be less expensive than the tunnelled alternatives.</p><p> </p><p>Since then,
DfT officials and HS2 Ltd have been challenged by Wendover Parish Council and your
predecessor, Sir David Lidington, over these decisions and have presented further
reports by OTB and Michael Byng (mbpc) challenging the consented scheme.</p><p> </p><p>In
each instance, it has been concluded that the Wendover Mined Tunnel would be harder
to construct, is costlier and involves a significantly greater degree of risk to the
consented scheme.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Department and
HS2 Ltd remain convinced that the Select Committee made the right decision when they
accepted that there was a significant difference in cost between the mined alternative
schemes and concluded that the HS2 Ltd scheme should be retained.</p><p> </p><p>Even
if the alternative mined schemes were broadly comparable in these respects, the subsequent
costs of seeking legislative consent for the detailed design change and the consequential
cost of delaying the introduction of HS2 services do not represent good value for
money or an effective use of public money.</p>
|
|
