The following amendments have been selected: amendment 1 in the name of Paul Davies, amendment 2 in the name of Jane Hutt, and amendment 3 in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2 and 3 will be deselected. If amendment 2 is agreed, amendment 3 will be deselected.

We move on to our next item on the agenda, which is the United Kingdom Independence Party debate on HS2 and the rail network in Wales, and I call on David Rowlands to move the motion. David.

Motion NDM6110 Neil Hamilton

The National Assembly for Wales believes:

That the HS2 project should be scrapped and the capital savings used to enhance the existing rail network, including:

(a) fully funding the electrification of the south Wales main line, and the south Wales metro project; and

(b) an extensive upgrading of the north Wales rail network.

Motion moved.

Thank you, madam Deputy Presiding Officer. I move this motion in the name of Neil Hamilton.

We move the motion that HS2 is abandoned and the resulting savings used to upgrade the existing network throughout the whole of the UK, including those in Wales. We argue that it is not too late to end this potentially disastrous project as although £2 billion has already been spent, not one spade of turf has yet been cut.

HS2 is a mode of transport designed to take pampered businessmen from London to a few cities in the north at a cost of many billions of pounds of British taxpayers’ money—£55 billion according to the latest estimate, but rising rapidly. In addition, the human and environmental cost is immeasurable in that this project calls for the destruction of at least 58 farms and many thousands of family homes. In fact, the proposed change to the route near Sheffield will call for destruction of a whole housing estate, which is, at this very moment, in the course of construction. All very ironic given that we are in the midst of catastrophic housing shortages, including in Sheffield itself, with 28,000 on its social housing waiting list.

The Presiding Officer took the Chair.

The very fact that HS2 is designed to run at 240 mph rather than run, like the usual continental high-speed trains, at 190 mph is in itself damaging to the environment, in that it increases carbon emissions by over 20 per cent, whilst reducing the time between London and Birmingham by a mere three and a half minutes.

The National Audit Office has itself criticised the scheme, arguing that many of the cost-benefit arguments are already being eroded by delays and increased budgets. They also say that the timescales for completion are unrealistic, with 2026 for London to Birmingham, 2027 to Crewe and 2033 to Manchester and Leeds being almost impossible to achieve. Add to this the opinion of many rail transport academics that far from helping towns such as Nottingham, Stockport and Wakefield, it may even have a damaging effect on their economies as it actually adversely affects the connectivity to the larger conurbations of the region.

Richard Wellings of the Institute of Economic Affairs even questioned the veracity of the claims that it would transform the economy of the regions where HS2 would most directly connect. So, what chance of any part of Wales gaining significant economic benefits? There have been many facile arguments used to promote what can only be called a vanity project by this UK Government. And here are just a few of them: HS2 will create greater connectivity between the north and the south, thus generating huge economic benefits to the northern regions. But opponents argue that it will simply make it easier for the brightest and the best from cities such as Manchester, Leeds and Hull to commute to much higher-paid jobs in London, which would, of course, have the adverse effect of losing some of the region’s best talent with its resultant loss to the local economy.

Will you take an intervention?

Yes, of course, Lee.

With respect, David, yesterday afternoon your party boycotted the Assembly because you said we were having a futile debate. Thus far in this debate, all you’ve talked about is England. So, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. [Laughter.]

Well, Lee, I don’t know if you’ve noticed the plans for this railway line, but it actually runs in England, not in Wales. [Interruption.] I shall come to the point of how it will affect Wales if you’d just give me the time to get there. Thank you.

There are also many who argue that much better connectivity is best achieved by upgrading existing lines and building a number of new cross-country lines or even reopening old cross-country lines. These, together with an upgrading of rolling stock, would alleviate many of the existing passenger capacity problems—all at a fraction of the cost of HS2.

In his report of 2014, Sir Patrick McLoughlin argued that the train from London to Crewe was the busiest in Britain, resulting in chronic overcrowding. However, by the time the report was published, the problem had been solved simply by adding four more carriages to the existing trains. Experts argue that with a programme of platform extensions, carriages could be added to many of our other busiest train routes.

Proponents of the scheme argue that HS2 is not so much about speed as capacity—faster trains mean more trains. In fact, this was the thrust of Chris Grayling’s argument on the ‘Sunday Politics’ show as late as last Sunday. When pressed, however, about the delivery date and cost, he was more than evasive, giving a time for completion as some time in the next decade.

The argument about greater capacity is to counter arguments by technical experts that much of the land between London and the north of England is unsuitable for a high-speed track without considerable foundation strengthening work. Such work would again add billions to the construction costs. Without these foundation improvements, trains would have to limit speeds to around 150 mph over many parts of the line.

Those who oppose HS2 also argue that, in addition to those mentioned above, there are many other ways to augment rail capacity. One proposal is to do away with first-class carriages, which, on average, run at just 10 per cent capacity. Well, I hope that would be a solution that I anticipate would be much applauded by both the socialist parties of this Chamber. In addition, with suitable infrastructure improvements, capacity can be increased significantly simply by adding more carriages. Digital technologies allow for advanced signal capabilities, and together with on-board safety features, especially driver-to-control centre communications, will allow for more frequent trains, as distances between trains could be considerably reduced with no loss of safety. The improvements indicated above applied across the whole of the UK network, including Wales, of course, would be far cheaper and far more effective than a single high-cost speed connection between London and the north.

And now, can I turn to Wales’s connection? [Interruption.] Can I turn to Wales’s connection, or should I say ‘non-connection’ with this HS2 project? Plaid Cymru AMs claim that they secured £84 million extra for the Wales transport budget, due to the fact that the UK Government increased its transport budget for HS2, also claiming, by the way, that Labour only jumped on the bandwagon, if you’ll excuse the pun, very late in the day. As laudable as this achievement is, it is simply an indication of the acceptance by the UK Government that the HS2 project is not only not beneficial to the Welsh economy, but actually damaging to it.

Some commentators put this negative effect over the life of the railway at around £4 billion—a figure, they argue, which, together with the £1.4 billion adverse effect to the Northern Ireland economy, should be added to the overall cost of HS2. That is, of course, if this compensation figure is to be rightfully paid to the two devolved Governments.

Both Plaid Cymru and Labour have been seesawing on this project ever since it was first envisaged, with Plaid having the dichotomy of having their MPs voting against HS2. The fact of the matter is that both Plaid and Labour seem to be citing the consequential payment as being the reason for supporting this project. Just two points on that matter: consequential payments should, or even would, be made for any increase in the Government’s allocation for the transport budget, irrespective of where that increase was spent. So, if the Government chose to spend the HS2 budget increase to improve the rail network in general, we could still expect to get this consequential-payment payment—unless, of course, Plaid and Labour are classing this consequential payment as a compensatory payment. A compensatory payment would, of course, be in order, as many reports, including two by KPMG, one for HS2 Ltd itself and one for the BBC too, estimated that negative cost to the Wales economy to be in the region of £200 million per year.

As indicated above, there will be no direct connection between HS2 and Wales, not to the south, not to the middle and not to the north. Indeed, the city probably most influential to the north Wales economy, unless we discount Crewe here, is Liverpool itself. Liverpool itself will have no direct connection with HS2, and it is understood that Liverpool’s metro system stalled 40 years ago due to lack of funds, with 4.5 miles of tunnels that had no track or trains. Are our ambitious metro plans to be stalled in the same way through lack of UK Government funds, as HS2 costs spiral out of control, already having risen from £17 billion in 2013 to present estimates of £55 billion? Not only that, but any rail infrastructure improvements planned for Wales would have to compete for the skilled workforce and equipment that would inevitably be sucked into such a vast project as HS2. Let us remind ourselves that just a fraction of that £55 billion plus would not only allow electrification to Swansea, but even on to Carmarthen. It would also find electrification of the south Wales Valleys lines and allow for much improved infrastructure, including electrification for the line serving north Wales.

I finally put it to you that HS2 is not of benefit to the Welsh economy. It is indeed damaging to it. So, if you truly believe in a prosperous, productive Welsh economy in the twenty-first century, you cannot but support this motion.

I have selected the three amendments to the motion. If amendment 1 is agreed, amendments 2 and 3 will be deselected. I call on Russell George to move amendment 1 tabled in the name of Paul Davies.

Amendment 1—Paul Davies

Delete all and replace with:

1. Recognises the social and economic benefits that HS2 will have for the people of mid and north Wales.

2. Calls on the Welsh Government to work constructively with the UK Government and regional transport bodies to ensure services and timetabling are organised to deliver maximum benefits of HS2 to the people of mid and north Wales.

Amendment 1 moved.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I’d like to move the amendments in the name of Paul Davies and, in doing so, raise my disappointment that UKIP have brought forward this motion today. There seems to be a failure to recognise the social and economic benefits that HS2 will bring to the people of mid and north Wales especially. The rejection of the scheme that will be the backbone, I think, to the UK rail network demonstrates the lack of ambition that you have in UKIP for the UK and, of course, Wales too.

Also, I am aware that some members of the UKIP group here do support the scheme, at least before they joined UKIP—. I note here a quote from Mark Reckless: ‘proud to vote for HS2’ and making the ‘positive case’ for the initiative, adding the estimates were ‘extremely conservative’. Of course, Mark Reckless also went on to produce a blog post actually detailing his support, but I appreciate that UKIP do not whip their group, so I look forward to Mark Reckless rejecting the motion and supporting our amendments later on.

Now, of course, we’re told that HS2 will be open in 2026. HS2 will serve the key towns and cities throughout England, also, of course, running up to Scotland as well. But by providing—[Interruption.] Yes, I will.

For the record, I had seen scope for the HS2 to support the Rochester and Stroud economy at the time that it was promised to have a cross-London link to take direct trains from Ebbsfleet to Manchester and Birmingham. That was then taken out of the project, and I withdrew my support and agreed with my colleague that it would not benefit the Welsh economy.

Oh, okay. Well, I’ve got your blog post in front of me here, but it very much contradicts some of the points that your colleague, sat next to you, was making. Perhaps I’ll pass it on to David Rowlands a little later to read.

Now, where was I? Where was I? Right. Even the people who don’t use trains as well, of course, will benefit, especially in north Wales. There are benefits, of course, from job creation and apprenticeships, created at the HS2 hub at Crewe, and, of course, the better connections it will bring to north and mid Wales.

We recently had a debate in this Chamber on the opportunities and challenges of the cross-border collaboration and the necessity to improve connectivity between north Wales and the emerging powerhouse in north England. Perhaps UKIP Members weren’t present for the debate, but from my recollection there was widespread agreement in the Chamber that, through cementing north Wales as a crucial part of the existing new economic region, we have the potential of facilitating significant growth in mid Wales, and re-balancing the economy of Wales as well, importantly, I think, away from the over-reliance on Cardiff and south Wales.

Finally, of course, the other issue is: I think it’s important, of course, that the Welsh Government needs to engage effectively with the UK Government and other regional bodies as well when it comes to ensuring that services and timetabling issues are organised, to deliver the maximum benefit from HS2 to the people of north Wales. I very much hope that perhaps the Cabinet Secretary can comment on that in his contribution, but I urge Members to reject this motion today and to support our amendments.

If amendment 2 is agreed, amendment 3 will be deselected. I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure to formally move amendment 2, tabled in the name of Jane Hutt.

Amendment 2—Jane Hutt

Delete all and replace with:

1. Recognises the social and economic benefits that HS2 will have for the people of mid and north Wales.

2. Calls on the Welsh Government to work constructively with the UK Government and regional transport bodies to ensure services and timetabling are organised to deliver maximum benefits of HS2 to the people of mid and north Wales.

3. Calls on the UK Government to:

(a) publish a timetable for electrification of the south Wales main line to Swansea;

(b) fully fund electrification of the north Wales mainline and south Wales valleys lines;

(c) guarantee all European Union funding planned for the South Wales Metro; and

(d) Begin negotiations to transfer funding and responsibility for rail infrastructure to Welsh Ministers.

Amendment 2 moved.

Formally.

I call on Dai Lloyd to move amendment 3, tabled in the name of Rhun ap Iorwerth.

Amendment 3—Rhun ap Iorwerth

Delete all and replace with:

1. Believes that the HS2 project is an England only infrastructure project and that Wales should receive a Barnett consequential that reflects this.

2. Believes that the funds received as a Barnett consequential should be used to create an effective transport infrastructure that links together all the regions of Wales, and that this should include the following projects:

(a) improving transport connections within Wales; improving links between north and south; and creating regional networks in our main urban areas such as the south Wales metro project and an extensive north Wales metro project;

(b) transport solutions that work for rural Wales and its particular demographic and geographic challenges; and

(c) the electrification of the north and south Wales main railway lines, and extensive upgrading of the broader Welsh rail network.

Amendment 3 moved.

Well, thank you very much, Llywydd. I’m pleased to be able to contribute to this debate, although I am slightly confused, if truth be told, because it’s not often that I stand to speak on a subject that has nothing to do with us here in Wales. We are talking about an infrastructure project that is an England-only infrastructure project. That’s what HS2 is. Of course, if it’s agreed, we will all be paying for it, but we are not making the decision here. The decision will be taken at another place. So, I am rather confused, if I may say.

What I would say, though, is that if this HS2 project does proceed, then we in Wales should have the Barnett consequential that reflects that, because there are so many major projects, including rail projects, that have happened in England and we haven’t received that consequential funding through Barnett, such as the Jubilee line and Crossrail. Nothing has been passed down as Barnett consequentials of those schemes. If this project does proceed, then our hope in Plaid Cymru is that we would receive significant funding—significant in Welsh terms, certainly—as Barnett consequentials.

Fundamentally, someone once said that if you want to travel from London to Birmingham and arrive 20 minutes earlier, then catch an earlier train. You don’t need to spend millions of pounds on such a rail line. Having said that, we do need funding to invest in improving links here in Wales. I will take this opportunity to mention that because our role in this place is to talk about the impact of projects on Wales. It has become pertinently obvious that we need to improve links between north and south Wales. There are many projects in the pipeline. Of course, we’re also mentioning the need to electrify the main line to Swansea. That is currently under threat following the Brexit vote. There are a number of proposals to improve north-south and south-north road links as well as to improve rail links between north and south, and they need investment now. I would also want to see the line between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth reopened, for example, so that we can discuss projects that are likely to happen within the borders of Wales, because those are the issues that we should be discussing in this place and we should be doing that regularly.

People will always say, ‘Well, from where would you get that money?’ Well, if HS2 is to be built, as I’ve already said, then we would insist on Barnett consequentials, because that doesn’t always happen, not by a long shot. That’s why, this week, we launched NICW—our NICW, that is. Our national infrastructure commission for Wales, which will be a body that will allow borrowing on an extensive scale; borrowing when it is cheap to do so, as it is now; and will be an arm’s-length body to attract huge investment so that we can achieve some of the aspirations that we have. There are some £40 billion infrastructure projects in the pipeline here in Wales, and there’s no prospect of any of them seeing the light of day at the moment. We must think far more broadly and be far more innovative in our thinking in terms of how we deal with the need to improve our infrastructure.

In drawing my comments to a close, we’ve had a debate tabled by UKIP on grammar schools, which exist in England and not in Wales, and we are today discussing HS2, which is an England-only infrastructure project, not a Welsh project. What next? What will be the next topic chosen for a UKIP debate in this place? A debate on the Wiltshire RDP, perhaps? Who knows? Thank you.

Here, two weeks ago, UKIP joined the other parties in agreeing a Welsh Conservative motion moved by me, which recognised that the proposals contained within ‘A Growth Vision for the Economy of North Wales’ offer the basis for improving the economic performance of north Wales and called on the Welsh Government to work with the UK Government and the North Wales Economic Ambition Board to deliver upgrades to the north Wales line. It’s therefore somewhat puzzling that in calling today for the HS2 project to be scrapped and the capital savings used, quote, ‘to enhance the existing rail network, including…upgrading of the north Wales rail network’, they’re actually taking an inconsistent and entirely contradictory position.

The North Wales Economic Ambition Board’s report, ‘A Growth Vision for the Economy of North Wales’, supported by the leaders and chief executives of all six unitary authorities in the region, the North Wales Business Council, both universities and both FE college groups, calls for the devolution of powers by the Welsh Government over employment, taxes, skills and transport. The infrastructure plan to enable growth, detailed within it, includes the delivery of a detailed prospectus called ‘Growth Track 360’,

‘for rail service improvements and connectivity with HS2 at Crewe hub—including proposals to improve: Service frequency and speed improvements…; Network capacity improvements…; Rolling stock improvements…; Electrification of the network…; Improved stations at Deeside’.

UKIP voted for this two weeks ago. The ‘Growth Track 360’ prospectus itself was issued in May 2016 by the Mersey Dee Alliance, the Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership and the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, and called for substantial rail investment to enable growth in the cross-border economy of the north Wales and Mersey Dee region.

‘Growth Track 360’, referred to in the document, was launched to secure £1 billion of rail improvements to transform the north Wales and Cheshire regional economy and deliver 70,000 new jobs over 20 years. Its calls include, and I quote from it:

‘The electrification of the line from Crewe to North Wales so the region can be linked to HS2 and fast London trains can continue to Bangor and Holyhead’.

The critical investments it detailed include, quote,

‘Preparing for HS2...Electrification between Crewe and Holyhead: Total impact/contribution to the economy of £2.5bn; To allow Pendolinos to be extended from Crewe to the North Wales Coast, and potentially HS2 classic compatible services; To facilitate electric services to run between the North Wales Coast and Manchester/Manchester Airport to connect with Northern Powerhouse Rail’.

The service enhancements that it lists include

‘1 train per hour: Holyhead—Chester—Crewe—London Euston (direct HS2 connectivity)’.

Under ‘return for investment’ and what it defines as a ‘positive cost benefit ratio’, it states that preparing for HS2 will facilitate both the

‘Ability to extend Pendolinos and HS2 services beyond Crewe to Chester and North Wales’ and

‘Connectivity with Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds and Northern Powerhouse.’

Additional capacity, with faster journey times, are intrinsic for commuters and freight transportation, and being able to link into HS2—and I’m quoting again from the ‘Growth Track 360’ document—means that north Wales can’t be dismissed by companies and people looking to relocate. The removal of obstacles created by the lack of rail infrastructure will reduce congestion, improve business logistics and attract investment and jobs.

In the interests, therefore, of both consistency and solidarity with north Wales, I urge UKIP to recognise, as they did two weeks ago, that the success of the growth vision for the economy of north Wales is predicated in significant part upon the HS2 project not being scrapped and therefore to return to the position they supported here just a fortnight ago. Thank you.

I call on the Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, Ken Skates.

Thank you, Presiding Officer, and can I thank Members for their contributions today and welcome the opportunity to debate this very important issue? I do believe that we have before us a once-in-a-generation opportunity to develop a world-class transport infrastructure in Wales. Together with metro south and metro north-east, the new Wales and borders franchise, upgrades to the A55, the M4 relief road, the reshaping of our bus network and the platform that our Active Travel (Wales) Act 2013 gives us in achieving modal shift, I believe that we have a fantastic opportunity to create an international quality integrated transport system across Wales.

That integration is essential. It’s essential because a high-quality transport system is critical in providing access to jobs and services. It is, in turn, central to a high-performing economy, and our railway network has a pivotal role to play in that. Efficient long-distance travel links and the development of HS2, I believe, will bring significant benefits to mid and north Wales as part of an integrated rail network across the UK. And this position is shared entirely by the ‘Growth Track 360’ participants, including further education, local authorities, councils from England and, of course, the private sector.

I want to make sure that it is properly integrated, though, into the economy of north Wales. The huge potential of the region could be unlocked if the UK Government were to bring forward funding to electrify the north Wales coast main line from Holyhead and Llandudno to Warrington and Crewe, and develop a fully integrated hub at Crewe. Ultimately, this could enable trains travelling to and from north Wales to use a new high-speed infrastructure. The Welsh Government is very happy to work with the UK Government to ensure that the benefits of HS2 are maximised, but we are disappointed that the UK Government has so far not agreed to devolve funding for rail infrastructure and powers to direct Network Rail, as was recommended by the Commission on Devolution in Wales. I’ll continue to press the UK Government to begin negotiations around the full devolution settlement recommended by the commission.

While funding for rail infrastructure is not devolved, we have used our powers to invest in rail enhancements, including in the Cambrian line and between Saltney and Wrexham. The Welsh Government worked with the North Wales Economic Ambition Board, the Mersey Dee Alliance, and the Cheshire and Warrington Local Enterprise Partnership to develop the strategic outline business case for the electrification of the north Wales main line. It is essential for the UK Government to ensure that Wales receives its fair share of the funding available for enhancing the rail network so that our rail infrastructure here in Wales does not fall further behind that enjoyed in the rest of Great Britain.

The recent track record, though, is not positive. Data published by the Office of Rail and Road illustrate that, between 2011 and 2015, only around 1 per cent of the UK Government’s investment in rail infrastructure enhancements was spent within the Wales route area. I’m pressing for the UK Government to give a commitment that it will spend its fair share of investment on rail enhancements in Wales during the next funding period.

The settlement needs to recognise the historic underinvestment we have seen in Wales, and the fact that Network Rail Wales’s route extends into England. Now, I don’t wish to jump the gun, but I am now pressing the UK Government for confirmation that the scheme will be delivered immediately after electrification to Cardiff is completed in 2018. This, of course, is the scheme to extend to Swansea. It’s essential for the UK Government to confirm that Wales will not lose out following the UK’s exit from the European Union. Of key significance of funding for the delivery of the south Wales metro and electrification to Milford Haven and Holyhead, as is required by 2030, under the regulations covering the trans-European transport network, UK Government funding must be made available to deliver against these requirements. Wales needs it, and our economy needs it.

I call on David Rowlands to reply to the debate.

Yes, thank you. Thank you all for your contributions to this debate. I’ll deal with Russell George where he said that we fail to recognise the benefits. But most economic experts say there will be no benefits to the Welsh economy if HS2 is to be built. And then Mark Isherwood went on to talk about this fanciful document, where the UK Government will be making absolutely certain that they will electrify north Wales, even though this project may have cost many billions of pounds more. Dai Lloyd—well, I’m quite bemused, actually, Dai, because everybody else in this Chamber recognises that this project does impact on Wales in a very, very—either, as we argue, detrimental manner, or, as the other people who’ve spoken—[Interruption] Can I just answer this? Thank you. Others say that it will be of great benefit to it. But, do you know, during all the Brexit debates, we heard a raft of reservations voiced by Plaid with regard to the willingness of the UK Government to pay over the funds previously coming to Wales from Brussels? Yet, here, they’re utterly content to rely on the supposedly endless largess of that same institution to fund the Welsh economy by way of consequential payments. A very worst case, if I might say, of naked hypocrisy. [Interruption.] I was making the very point. Well—

Don’t tempt them.

Ken Skates—I’ll deal with what Ken had to say. Ken, I echo all of your desires to upgrade the transport system in Wales, and it is precisely this argument that we are putting today: that the funding of this HS2 project will massively impact on the ability of you yourself, using all your skills, which I’m sure you will, in receiving as much funding for the necessary upgrading that we really do need in Wales. And what we’re saying is that, if this project were abandoned, the £50 billion-odd, which will probably end up at £70 billion would be much, much better spent on upgrading the general network right throughout the United Kingdom, but very much so right throughout Wales as well.

The proposal is to agree the motion without amendment. Does any Member object? [Objection.] I will defer voting under this item until voting time.

Voting deferred until voting time.

We have now reached voting time. Unless three Members wish for the bell to be rung, I will proceed directly to voting time.