HS2 report supressed

[cjp]

From the guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/30/transport-secretary-blocks-hs2-report

Transport secretary blocks HS2 report
Opponents of high-speed rail network accuse Patrick McLoughlin after he vetoes publication of November 2011 review
Gwyn Topham, transport correspondent
The Guardian, Thursday 30 January 2014 19.09 GMT


HS2
Opponents of HS2 say that the November 2011 report was scathingly critical of the project. Photograph: HS2/PA

Anti-HS2 campaigners have accused the government of censorship after the transport secretary blocked the release of a sensitive report believed to undermine the case for the proposed high-speed rail network.

Patrick McLoughlin took the unusual step of vetoing the publication of a November 2011 review by the Major Projects Authority, despite the information commissioner saying it should be released after Freedom of Information requests.

Opponents of the £42.6bn HS2 project believe that the report contained material that painted the scheme in scathing terms. The MPA review, one of a series conducted into major public spending infrastructure projects across the country, downgraded its assessment of HS2 to amber-red – signalling that the scheme's successful completion was believed to be in doubt.

Names could be redacted or at least the conclusions published so argumants might be considered.

Fishy smell !

 

[DXMachina]

Good. Heard enough tedious wittering from opponents. Time to stop mucking around & build it !

 

[RPM]

Good. Heard enough tedious wittering from opponents. Time to stop mucking around & build it !

Well said

 

[bnm]

Why couldn't this report, and the criticisms of the HS2 white elephant within it, be released with names of the critics redacted?

Censorship to protect individuals is just about agreeable, but the whole report?

Something is rotten in the state of DfT.

 

[WatcherZero]

The main reason is that its identified dangers to the completion of the project are 3 years out of date so would only muddy the waters in the current debate. The confidentiality of the views is just a legal excuse not to publish it.

 

[Johnuk123]

You don't supress good news, this report is obviously very bad news for pro HS2 people.

 

[TheKnightWho]

You don't supress good news, this report is obviously very bad news for pro HS2 people.

Good to have the anti-change crowd out in force today.

 

[YorkshireBear]

People fail to grasp that every project has good and bad reports. One bad report is ysed as difinitive evidence of the project failure but 100 good reports count for nothing.

 

[Johnuk123]

Good to have the anti-change crowd out in force today.

I think you need to apologise or show a post of mine where I said I was against HS2.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I think you need to apologise or show a post of mine where I said I was against HS2.

I think you need to apologise or show a post of mine where I was being sarcastic.

 

[Johnuk123]

I think you need to apologise or show a post of mine where I was being sarcastic.

Did you not call me the anti-change crowd or are you going to pretend it was somebody else.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Did you not call me the anti-change crowd or are you going to pretend it was somebody else.

I'm not denying that, but I'm just a little put-out that you seem to be making all-sorts of assumptions about my motive whilst getting all annoyed that I might be doing the same thing.

 

[anme]

A problem is that humans suffer from very serious confirmation bias. They uncritically accept any evidence that supports their opinions and uncritically reject any evidence that suggests they are wrong.

I am reminded of a leaflet I once saw opposing a tram scheme. It included both the following arguments (I don't remember the exact wording, but you will get the gist):
- Trams are so quiet that old ladies and children won't hear them coming and will be mown down in droves.
- Trams are so noisy that no-one near the line will ever sleep again.

BTW, I'm making a general point that applies to both sides, not taking one side or the other.

 

[Snapper]

Talk about much ado about nothing. The report the anti Hs mob are making a fuss about dates from 2011. In 2013 the MPA uprated Hs2's status from Amber/Red to Amber, so the 2011 report is ancient history.

Funnily enough, the antis forget to mention that.

They also neglect to mention that it's Govt policy not to release ANY MPA reports, not just the one on Hs2. Their reasons are as given - to protect people who have given evidence on conditions of anonymity.