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.