Papers and Submissions:

18 December 2024 letters from Lord Hendy to Jane Kirkham MP and others on Old Oak Common and other uses relating to the South West. Unfortunately the minister's letter fails to answer the questions I have already put. Please read: Lord Hendy-Old Oak Common & Lord Hendry to Jayne Kirkhan MP-Old Oak Common 9th December 2024 - Why is a station on the GWR fast lines at OOC necessary? How many passengers are expected to use it?2 By building just the GW slow line station at OOC, how much disruption can be saved to intercity services?3. How much cost can be saved. (241218) (41219). 18 December 2024 See written Answers to my Questions. They are due for answer two weeks after they are put. Written questions submitted by Lord Berkeley - MPs and Lords - UK Parliament 9th December 2024 - HS2 is causing seven years of grief for Great Western passengers to and from Paddington by work on Old Oak Common GW station. Press release – immediate release Mon 9 December 2024 Rail works for the GWR main line station at Old Oak Common will cause disruption for seven years to allow the construction of a 8-platform station to allow interchange between the HS2 OOC station and GW services. During this time, many services will be affected – from the South West, from South Wales, the Bristol area as well as Cheltenham, Oxford and Reading. A few intercity services will be diverted into Euston, but overall capacity will be seriously affected with passengers encouraged to change onto the Waterloo services at Reading, adding perhaps an hour to the overall journey time. Oxford passengers can use the service to Marylebone. Capacity and journey times are a major problem – when many trains from South Wales and the West Country already full to capacity. If half or more of these trains are cancelled because they cannot all go to Euston, rail travel will be seriously affected. Why is all this necessary? Ministers will not give reasons. A station on the GW main line is necessary to connect to the HS2 services, whether some terminate there or continue to Euston if it is built. Most HS2 passengers will want to catch the Elizabeth line into central London – they will save 12 minutes compared to continuing to Euston and going on the Northern Line. With this saving, who go to Euston? What is the point of spending over £12bn on tunnelling and approaches from OOC to Euston? Some may wish to go by rail to Heathrow and other stations west of OOC to Reading, all well served by the Elizabeth Line which, incidentally, was designed to be given extra carriages and additional trains when demand required it. So who will want to connect to HS2 from the GW intercity services at OOC? Birmingham to Reading – use Cross Country direct from Reading to Birmingham! Ditto Bristol or South Wales to Birmingham. Why ever go via Old Oak Common? There is therefore no justification that I have seen to build platforms on the GWR fast lines at OOC. That would save perhaps £5bn in capital cost and enable the intercity services to continue at their present speeds to paddington rather than take 5 minutes longer. Ministers need urgently to explain to the many passengers affected by this seven-year disruption: 1 Why is a station on the GWR fast lines at OOC necessary? How many passengers are expected to use it? 2 By building just the GW slow line station at OOC, how much disruption can be saved to intercity services? 3. How much cost can be saved? We have asked the Rail Minister, Lord Henry, for a meeting with affected members of parliament and peers to answer these questions in detail. Attached are letters and briefings from the South West Peninsular Task Force. Wales rail interests must join in this campaign. For references and responses by ministers, see House of Lords Written Answers to Tony Berkeley over the last 12 months, (Attachments: MP Briefing OOC 26.11.24 Plus rh241206 Martin Sheppard Travel Times 8 December 2024 & PRTF Letter to Rail Minister 30.08.24) 6 th October 2024 Letter to Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer, about the mess that HS2 has got itself into on Euston, finance and the idea of an independent study by a consultant employed by DfT and HS2! (rh242206) 6 October 2024 Letter to Sir Simon Case, Cabinet Secretary, asking him to reopen an inquiry into the performance of ministers and parliament, previously vetoed by Boris Johnson when he was PM. (rh241006) 20 September2024; After the Panorama programme on HS2 on Monday 16 September, Doug Thornton has commented – and I agree! HS2 Phase 1 over £104 and rising! ‘What I find shocking are the finances. Michael Byng’s £88bn figure for the truncated OOC to Curzon Street seems to be accepted now, grossed to 2024 gives £104bn. Thats bad enough at a time when Rachel Reeves has a £22bn black hole in the fisc and Kier has turned off Grannies winter heating allowance, but it’s so much worse. Funding is from the public purse therefore there will be an annual interest bill on the £104bn of 4.25% based on the 10 Year Gilt rate, capitalise that at the Treasury Very Long Term Discount Rate of 3% and this produces a ‘Net Present Cost’ inclusive of funding charges of c.£250bn…assuming we then need add sunk costs and the capitalised running losses of the curtailed railway (who after all will pay a premium ticket price for the inconvenience of the terminus locations?) and we’re nicely above a quarter of a trillion… Tony, are we really going to spend 10% of National Debt on a loss making railway to nowhere when Reeves is set to tax everything that moves? 14 th August 2024 Reply by Rail Minister Lord Hendy to my letter asking for details about HS2, Old Oak Common station and the route to Euston. They plough on regardless of cost, safety or customer needs! (rh240810) 8 th July 2024 – letter to Louise Haigh MP, the new S of S for Transport on the London end of HS2: ‘mopping up HS2 after the Tory Disaster’ offering an alternative, cheaper and safer tunnel route from Old Oak Common to Euston; tying it in with the proposal by Chris Gibb to use the planned HS2 and existing tilting trains more effectively and creating one unified station. All as proposed by Sam Price and others to the Select Committee some years ago: (rh240708 to Louise Haigh MP) (rh240701 Michael Byng paper including option to privately finance the tunnel to Euston) Sam Price alternative: rh161012 Euston express overall ppt-002.pdf (tonyberkeley.co.uk). (rh250520 A new approach for HS2 – Gibb). 23 rd February 2025 letter to the Prime Minister ‘HS2 is still bleeding the country dry’ (rh240220) and suggests that he finishes what he started and sets out his earlier decision in words of one syllable: 1. Stop all work on HS2 and mothball all construction sites. 2. Close down HS2 Ltd and its many contractors. 3. DfT to demonstrate how the £36bn is saved. 4. Cancel the order for HS2 trains. 5. Set up a new development company to re-engineer the parts of HS2 between Birmingham and Old Oak Common for lower cost, conventional speeds and connections to other rail lines. 6. Put an early deadline on private sector commitments to build the tunnels from OOC and the HS2 station at Euston. Otherwise, cancel this part, make OOC the terminus of this small new line, save another £15bn and hand the sites to Network Rail. Further reading – the Economist (rh240218) The horror story of HS2, And Stephen Glaister in Prospect Magazine: 1 - Why Large Scale Public Transport Projects Go Off The Rails 2 - Sunak HS2 Cancellation More Problematic Than You Think 3 - HS2 Train Birmingham Government 15 November 2023 letter to Huw Merriman, Minister for Railways, on options for the Euston end of HS2 that could save the government a lot of money. (rh231113). View the Sam Price PowerPoint presentation. (rh231108) Up to 1 November 2023 – a dozen written Questions and Answers following the cancellation of parts of HS2 on 7 October 2023. Read written answers. 18 September 2023: Press release HS2 dismemberment taking too long! With HS2 costs still rocketing towards £180 bn, at 2 nd Quarter 2023 prices, Tony Berkeley and Michael Byng publish a detailed criticism of the failure of the PAC and the NAO to investigate independently the likely outcome costs. A rubber stamp Report agreeing with government on the costs of the largest transport construction project in the UK at the moment reflects badly on the PAC’s ability to hold ministers to account. In the meantime, HS2 is creeping to dismemberment with rumours of Phase 2 being scrapped and Phase 1 terminating at Old Oak Common. Rishi Sunak ‘pushing for HS2 to stop six miles from Euston station’ (the Times 16 September, 2023). If ministers want to retain the parts of HS2 where construction has started (Birmingham to Old Oak Common) and convert it into a useful railway for local and regional services, that would at least prevent a permanent eyesore. For the rest, Rishi Sunak is right – Old Oak Common would work well as a terminus connecting to the Elisabeth Line if the project to Euston was scrapped at a saving of £12bn. Similarly, with some improved connections to the existing network, the West and East Midlands could be better linked using the HS2 line between Curzon St and the new HS2 station at Birmingham international and on to Derby and Nottingham. For the remainder of the HS2 route, it is time to start again from scratch and allow the regional mayors and other experts to decide what their local electorate want for their local and regional services from some of the savings made by cancelling most of HS2. Government has started the dismemberment of HS2 – with the removal of the eastern leg and the link North from Crewe in 2022. Now it seems that all of Phase 2 is for the chop and now the £12bn link to Euston station. Death by a thousand cuts is taking a long time!! In the meantime, we have asked the PAC to revisit their latest report on HS2 and take into account a much wider range of independent evidence – rather than using Department for Transport evidence to hold Government to account. rh230914 letter to PAC/NAO, rh230906 Analysis and Commentary. 28 July 2023: Treasury controlled Infrastructure Project Authority says about HS2 Phase 1 and 2A ‘Successful delivery of the project appears to be unachievable. There are major issues with project definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable.’ What are they waiting for? Read Annual Report on Major Projects 2022-23 16 July 2023 – press release - HS2 and Euston – the end of the line? Two damning reports – Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office. (rh230715) 20 th June 2023; press release: After a rubber-stamp National Audit Office Report on HS2, there are no independent checks, and cost and programme are now away with the fairies! DFT’s progress report on HS2, published yesterday 19 th June 2023, is only 3 months late and confirms that: - Neither HS2 or DfT have any clue as to a safe, suitable and cost effective design for Euston HS2 station; - the latest costs and the effect on these and programmes of the 2 year pause on work at Euston and other parts of HS2 are unknown. The outturn costs of the project is now estimated by Michael Byng and myself at over £182.1bn at 1 st Quarter 2023 prices. The Government Funding Envelope, as approved by parliament remains at £102 billion. The project as it stands has no terminal station that will work at Euston or Manchester, and the Manchester authorities have petitioned hard to get a through underground station there on the same lines as every other major new station built on the continent in the last 50 years. However, clearly ministers and HS2 know better and are continuing to throw billions at the project rather than improve local rail services and make some move towards net zero carbon by doing some electrification. However, secrecy is their best weapon against any challenge, and the Critique by Michael Byng and Tony Berkeley of the National Audit Office Report on HS2’s Euston project lays bare the complete failure of the NAO to challenge HS2 and DfT and to work to their own ‘Framework to Review Programmes’, covering purpose, value, set-up and delivery and variation management. In our assessment, the NAO fails on all four of its own criteria. My conclusion is that this NAO failure is most likely caused by the continuing refusal of the DfT and HS2 to tell the whole truth about costs. This was very evident during the preparation of the Oakervee Report, when neither HS2 nor the DfT would produce any credible budget, cost report or forecasts, relying on the argument of confidentiality. This could well be why the NAO has been unable or unwilling to delve more deeply into the project until it is deemed too late to cancel. This results in what might well be called a ‘rubber stamp’ on Government policies with a veneer of gentle independence rather than the rigorous challenge of government policies that I believe Parliament should expect. In my letter to the NAO, I request that they revisit the whole exercise again, obtain the necessary information from different sources, and produce a revised report on which the Public Accounts Committee can then make a thorough examination of DfT and HS2. rh230619 Critique on NAO Report on Euston and rh230620 Letter to NAO 20 th March 2023 – Message to Huw Merriman MP, Rail Minister: HS2 after the Budget – no more money for the railways from DfT; here’s how they could get out of their financial hole and stop digging! (rh230315). 7 February 2023 – letter to Jeremy Hunt MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer, on how to downsize and descope HS2, cancel its Euston station and leave most of the funding for the railways in the North and Midlands. (rh230206) 27 January 2023 – Sun Op-ed by Tony Berkeley ‘Expert’s verdict on a shambles. It a vanity project that is bleeding the railways to death…Kill it now, save £160bn and use HALF that to create a proper train service for the NORTH!’ (rh230127) 27 January 2023. My response to the Sun's headline today 'HIGH SPEED FAIL HS2 shambles as it’s revealed £60billion high-speed rail project may not even go to central LONDON' Read HS2 Chaos May Not Reach Central London This is very likely to be the case, since there is currently no safe and approved design for the tunnel and caverns approaching Euston – either with a serious risk of settlement of the existing WCML tracks or of collapse of retaining walls and houses behind on the west of the approaches. Old Oak Common cannot easily be redesigned to terminate all the planned HS2 trains; where would the others go? The essential GW line station at OOC will cost £7bn but there is no budget in the HS2 works for this. Total cost of HS2 now estimated to be £161bn – see my speech in the Lords on levelling up Col 1777 Read Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill Cancelling HS2 Birmingham to London would cost around £10bn lost, since much of the land could be sold or repurposed. HS2 to Crewe and Manchester could easily be cancelled at minimum cost. I suggest spending part of the money saved on improving rail network in the North and Midlands, particularly the local and regional services and East West and including Bradford – which has one of the worse rail services for such a large city. East West is the priority Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds with a through underground station at Manchester – as proposed by many local authorities in the area. Getting to and from London may be a priority for politicians and business leaders, but the existing services are generally good. Why do you need to get to London 30 minutes quicker when you have wifi and your laptop on the train? Compare this with the need for better local rail services for the daily commute for education, jobs, shopping or whatever – by rail rather than car? My vision would be to see the rail network in the North and Midlands as good as that of the south east around London – mostly electrified, reliable, comfortable and fast! At the moment, the rest of the rail network is being starved of funds for even minor enhancements whilst the vanity project that is HS2 bleeds other parts of the railway to death! 1 November 2022 – To Prime Minister Rishi Sunak - Put HS2 into Administration! HS2 is bleeding the country dry at a rate of £200m per week; several essential parts are uncosted but still the total reaches £152 bn. (rh221101). 4 October 2022 – press release: HS2 cost at today’s prices £155.52bn; Net cost of cancellation and repurposing £8bn (rh221003) 3 October 2022 – letter to the Times (Read PDF) 19 August 2022. Do you need £100bn? Letter to Truss and Sunak offering a solution to the transport problems in many Red Wall areas and save around £100bn, challenging them to: - Commit to creating the Red Wall Express routes and a similar one East West in the Midlands to provide earlier and dramatic improvements to rail services within these regions; and - Cancel HS2 and repurpose the sections already started. This would save around £100bn which they might find useful in funding the many pressing needs to deal with inflation, energy costs and the Red Wall transport needs at the expense of getting to London more quickly in 20 years’ time? (rh220819). 16 August 2022 Letter to Grant Shapps MP, Secretary of State for Transport, questioning the lack of independent data and studies, and associated construction costs and ongoing monitoring, to avoid settlement of HS2 over the areas where salt and coal mines have left large underground voids. (rh220816). 29 July 2022 latest update from Michael Byng in letter to Kit Malthouse MP shows overall cost reaching £136.37bn and completion dates for Phases 1 and 2A to Crewe 2035-6 and to Manchester 2045. Critical issues are the lack of a firm design for the approaches to Euston and uncertain settlement issues and speed limits over the Cheshire brine fields. (rh220728). 10 March 2022: Independent consultant Michael Byng told an All-Party Parliamentary Rail Group (APPRG) meeting that whistleblowers have said that there are “two sets” of High Speed 2 (HS2) accounts – one "internal" and one that is shared with the DfT. Byng claims that important cost trends are being withheld in the accounts shared with the DfT. However Lyons (HS2) refuted these claims in the APPRG meeting. (rh220310). 4 March 2022 – An alternative to the Integrated Rail Project. To deliver the regional services that the North and Midlands want rather than just getting to London more quickly! This is a concentration on smaller regional projects with the emphasis on electrification and capacity can deliver more benefits more quickly than HS2 and many of its projects included in the IRP – for the same estimated costs of just over £90bn. (rh220304). 31 st January 2022- Integrated Rail Plan – no funding for projects beyond HS2. A study of the IRP documentation by Michael Byng has found that there is no funding in it for projects outside what is left of HS2. The IRP states that HS2 Phases 1 and 2A will take £42 bn leaving £54 bn of its £96bn budget for other projects. Contemporary evidence is that the total cost of HS2 (Phases 1, 2A, 2B (Crewe to Manchester) and West to East Midlands is £125.52bn. So there is no funding at all for other parts of the IRP…full details (rh220131). 1 January 2022 – formal request to the Prime Minister to investigate a potential breach of the Ministerial Code (rh220105), paragraph 1.3 by failing to ‘give accurate and truthful information to Parliament’, ‘knowingly misleading Parliament’, and failing to be ‘as open as possible with Parliament and the public, refusing to provide information only when disclosure would not be in the public interest’ relating to HS2. The Cabinet Secretary thought this should be investigated by the Department for Transport, against whom the complaint is made; a bit like asking a person charged with a crime to decide whether he/she is guilty! 25 October 2021. Letter to Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for HS2, on Wendover tunnel option (rh211025) 16 October 2021. Letter from Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for HS2, commenting on Michael Byng’s cost estimate below. (rh211016) 4 October 2021. Copy e mail from Tony Berkeley to members of parliament attaching Michael Byng’s latest cost estimate for HS2. (rh211007) 13 September 2021. Memo M Byng to MPs on cost of cancelling HS2. (rh210913) 9 September 2021 – Tony Berkeley’s speech on debate in House of Lords on Standards in Public Life. Hansard: Standards in Public Life - Thursday 9 September 2021 - Hansard - UK Parliament Lord Berkeley - Briefing for Debate on standards in public life, House of Lords, Thursday 9 th sept 2021 Headlines: Whistleblowers from inside HS2 and DfT have provided 85MB of documentation which indicates: Phase 1 unlikely to open until 2041. Phase 1 - HS2 did have a detailed cost estimate of £47.2bn but denied its existence and but sought approval from Parliament for the Hybrid Bill quoting a figure of £23.5bn. Successive ministers have misled parliament by using the lower cost figure when they knew from 2016 onwards that this was unachievable. I ask the Prime Minister to set up an inquiry to investigate ministers’ misleading parliament. Full details on (rh210910). 7 September 2021 Cabinet Secretary to Lord Berkeley (rh210907) 12 August 2021 second letter to Simon Case, Cabinet Secretary asking him for a reply to my letter of 9 July. I quote Sir Tim Lankester, a previous permanent secretary. who is perhaps best known for his work in upholding the integrity and independence of the civil service against overbearing ministerial interests in linking overseas aid to arms sales. Sir Tim comments to me in relation to HS2: ‘Dear Tony,Like you, I think the continuing deception over the costs of HS2 is an absolute disgrace. We had come to expect this from ministers, trying to protect their own backs and trying to protect the project's credibility against mounting evidence that it is a gigantic waste of the nation's scarce resources. But what I find utterly horrible, and in some ways even worse, is the Permanent Secretary's complicity in this deception. Her weasel words distinguishing between what she said was in the budget and what the project will cost are utterly unacceptable from a senior civil servant, or indeed from any civil servant. And this is no ordinary deception when we are talking about a project costing more than £100 billion. Yours, Tim’ My letter to Simon Case concludes: ‘So I suggest that you owe it to your colleagues, to officials and members of parliament, as well as to members of the public, to provide a substantive response to my letter of 9 July 2021. Without such a response, supported by evidence which would enable a proper debate to take place, I fear that the reputation of this Government, supported by a professional and independent civil service, for financial probity, for transparency and general competence will be severely and adversely affected.’ (rh210811). 4 August 2021: reply from the Permanent Secretary at the Department for Transport to my letter dated 9 July 2021 to the Cabinet Secretary about fraud in misleading parliament on HS2. Since most of this fraud comes from the Department for Transport, it is surprising that the Cabinet Secretary does not feel it appropriate to investigate or even reply independently rather than ask the accused to respond in it is own defence. I am drafting responses which will be posted here. (rh210804). 9 July 2021: Ministerial fraud in misleading parliament on the £142bn HS2 project. Letter to Simon Case, Cabinet Secretary, in connection with what I believe to be ministerial fraud in misleading parliament on the £142bn HS2 project. For over 5 years, ministers from the present Prime Minister downwards knew about the ballooning costs of HS2, but chose to keep the true costs from parliament in order to get the project approved. (rh210709) and attachment (rh210711). 30 June 2021: Wendover mined tunnel option. A further letter to the Minister for HS2, Andrew Stephenson MP, challenging the continuing obfuscation and refusal to enter into discussion on the engineering and ground conditions that make the mined tunnel option at Wendover not only millions of pounds cheaper than the HS2 intrusive viaduct, but achievable using the same procedures (Transport and Works Act Order) as DfT is using for a similar tunnel further up the Phase 1 route. I ask for a meeting. (rh210630). 22 March 2021. Letter to Transport Ministers Andrew Stephenson MP and Baroness Vere. Have they misled parliament and broken the ministerial code over Wendover? (r210322) Paragraph 1.3 c of the Ministerial Code: ‘c. It is of paramount importance that Ministers give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity. Ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the Prime Minister;’ 11 February 2021. There IS an alternative to HS2 – invest in rail in the regions to bring benefit by 2025, nearly 20 years earlier than HS2, and still save £135bn! (rh21010) Need: The Northern Region and Midlands need over £100bn of rail improvements, whether HS2 gets built or not, in order to ‘rebalance the economy’. Changing demand: Any growth in demand for rail is now for local and regional services, not for first-class intercity high-speed trains. Save £135bn: Cancel most of HS2 (incl Phases 1 and 2A) and save £135bn over 20+ years. How can a responsible government spend such sums without an up-to- date demand assessment? Jobs: Regional rail improvements create rail high tech jobs from 2022, five years earlier than HS2. Regions to own Service Specification: Allow each region to set its service specification for regional services now and allow Network Rail to start on the quick wins such as electrification. Small schemes deliver earlier benefits: Allow Network Rail to spend on small schemes, without Treasury approval which can take 9 months for a £500,000 project to resurface a station platform. Compare this with Treasury spending £10m a day on HS2, whose overspend has already reached 230%.’ 1 February 2021 - An occasional update on HS2: becoming a pointless £142bn spend! - Future demand for long distance rail travel: during a second lockdown with potentially longer effects, we still have no information from ministers on the likely demand for rail travel in the future, short medium or long term. - Swampy digging in at Euston; why do they not stop HS2 at Old Oak Common? National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) report largely supporting my views on HS2. Read - RNA Final Report. - Ministers have cut Network Rail’s enhancement budget by £1bn, suggesting that they do not see rail needing any investment to help meet our zero-carbon agenda. We build HS2 because the construction industry is in a fragile position’ Oakervee December 2020. HS2 and its construction industry at the moment seems to be wrecking the fragile countryside and around Euston. The industry would be better employed working on smaller and lower cost rail improvements as proposed by NR and the NIC Regional infrastructure pipelines show government is yet to deliver on ‘levelling up’ pledge - New Civil Engineer. Phase 2A West Midlands to Crewe ready for Royal Assent. Full document on (rh210131). 16 December 2020 - Oakervee explains why he recommended HS2 to go ahead – to support the construction industry! https://youtu.be/KEqUhmbuZ-4?t=311 At the Transport for the North online conference on 14 December, Doug Oakervee explains what drove the panel to reach its conclusions earlier this year. His revelation is shocking. Firstly he says the recommendation to the Prime Minister to go ahead with the whole of HS2 was driven by a need to get the Southern leg started as the notice to proceed was due. That in turn was driven by 4 factors: - £9billion had been spent already and the prospect for recovery was minimal. - Properties and communities along the line had been blighted for many years - The construction industry was in a fragile position and if HS2 had been cancelled it would have done tremendous harm to the construction industry and the supply chain and congestion on the west coast line between London and Rugby. In other words the first 3 of the reasons had nothing to do with the merits/demerits of HS2 as a rail project! His report of February 2020 did make the same point as item 3 above but it is just one of many other conclusions. Stripped down to its bones in December 2020 Mr Oakervee says the needs of the Construction Industry was a major driver for proceeding. 15 December 2020 - Government must now implement the National Infrastructure Commission’s Report - Rail Needs Assessment for the Midlands and the North, published today - (rh201214) The Report states that the need for rail improvements is greatest in the regions, and that therefore priority should be given to upgrades in these areas and, if the money was available, prioritsing regional links. - Tony Berkeley press release (rh201215) 27 November 2020 - Press release - A Rail network for the North by experts in the North. - (rh201120) - (rh201120) - (rh201124) Network North will enable a network of services between centres in the Northern Powerhouse region and beyond to provide a range of services to match those around London. Unlike HS2 Phase 2B, some projects are shovel ready for the expert rail construction sector – such as extending the Midland Main Line electrification, Manchester Piccadilly Castlefield Corridor improvements with upgrades to the East Coast Main Line already in progress. All they need is DfT funding to start next year. Network North aims to introduce region-wide electrification, leading to more frequent services connecting the many important centres and providing new opportunities for jobs, shopping, visiting friends and relatives etc,. 4 November 2020 - Tony Berkeley - HS2 update 3 November 2020. - (rh201103) - (rh2011043) - (rh201103) HS2 Phase 1 costs are now 5 times higher than when it was started, with no safe and approved design for Euston; and Crossrail 2, previously thought essential by DfT and TfL for HS2 passengers, ‘paused’. Demand for rail travel is still 40% below earlier this year, and DfT says it has done no assessment of future demand. So will Government ‘pause’ or cancel parts or all of HS2 to save the now overall cost of around £170 bn? 2 October 2020 - Major Projects - Is the Government a competent client? - rh200930 Veiw the full report - Report on Infrastructure Governance, The Gerrard Report, September 2020. 10 September 2020 - Letter to Andrew Stephenson MP on the Wendover tunnel option. Tony Berkeley challenges the reasons for DfT trying to close down discussion on this option on the grounds of cost (but HS2’s record on costs is questionable), on building tunnels in chalk (it is quite possible if you want to do so!) and the need or not to seek new permissions for a tunnel (there is a precedent for using the Transport and Works Act Order procedures). He concludes that ministers could do this with a positive message and no detriment to the overall project. See associated documents - (rh200902) - (rh200905) - (rh200909) - (rh200910) 5 September 2020 - Press Release - HS2 – ‘To build or not to build' - where is any commitment? Today, the Prime Minister said HS2 would ‘fire up economic growth and help rebalance opportunity…across the country for years to come.’ HS2’s Mark Thurston said ‘the reality of high speed journeys joining up Britain’s cities in the North and Midlands and using that connectivity to help level up the country has just moved a step closer’. But where is the commitment backed up by money? The most important means of rebalancing the economy is to give the North and Midlands at least the same level of commuter services that the South East enjoys. HS2 delivers very little of this……. - (rh200903) 18 August 2020 - Press release - Invest in the classic rail network rather than close it! The tragic derailment near Stonehaven last week reminds us of the increasing severity of storms and floods on our classic rail system. It follows a warning only four weeks ago from the Office of Rail Regulation about the vulnerability of Network Rail assets to landslips and severe weather. Government policy to target zero carbon by 2050 can only mean, for transport, increasing rail use and increasing investment including more electrification. Rail is by far the safest form of travel, over 1,000 times safer than road travel. So there is a strong argument for greater investment in rail, in particular on the classic lines which were generally built over 150 years ago before the extreme weather hit us so frequently. In my Dissenting Oakervee Report on HS2 (January 2020) I urged the government to prioritise local and regional lines and services in the areas served by HS2, at a cost of £128.5bn in addition to the £106bn cost of HS2. In July 2020, along with Michael Byng, I published a report on improving the rail infrastructure of the South West at a cost of £1.2bn, less than 1% of the £106bn cost of HS2. Both these reports reflect the greater need for improved local and regional rail connectivity and resilience, to encourage economic regeneration and help achieve a lower carbon transport system – something that HS2 does not do. We must also consider whether the many reports of more permanent remote working, particularly by those who were travelling longer distances by rail, will not reduce demand for longer distance rail travel to the extent that the existing intercity services could serve customers well for many years. After all, the use of laptops on longer journeys also reduces the need for world-beating speeds on our small country! However, Private Eye 1528 published last week reported that the Treasury wants to do another round of ‘Beeching’ cuts on the rail network to reduce the £700m per month it is paying to the railway to substitute the fares lost through Corona Virus lockdown, exacerbated by government advice to avoid public transport where possible. If Treasury wants to save £700m per month on the rail sector, then it could cancel or reduce the scope of HS2, saving up to £120bn, and invest, instead, on modernisation the classic regional rail infrastructure and instruct the Department for Transport Ministers to encourage and promote rail transport rather than tell people to avoid rail where possible. That is the quickest way of increasing the revenue of the railways and helping the transport sector achieve zero carbon. 14 July 2020 - Letter to Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for Railways, on the failure of Government and HS2 ltd to comply with the Development Agreement between them, and concludes: ‘From the information which I have summarised above, it would appear that these changes to the Development Agreement and continuing failure to inform Parliament in a regular and consistent basis were and are intended to mislead parliament. The May 2020 Report of the PAC makes similar strong criticism, as did my Dissenting Report on HS2 dated January 2020; it is surely time to accept in public the comments in the letter sent by S of S Patrick McLaughin MP to Chancellor George Osborne MP dated 11 May 2016 saying, and I paraphrase, ‘We cannot build HS2 for the price, but let’s keep any increase totally secret otherwise Parliament may not approve the Phase 1 Bill.‘ - (rh200714) 30 June 2020 - Royal Over-Seas League Lecture. Lord Berkeley was asked to speak on the future of rail in the UK. He recently published a dissenting report into the High Speed 2 project on January 5, calling it ‘the wrong and expensive solution’ to providing better north–south inter-city services and improving services in the Midlands and North of England. He was Deputy Chair of the Oakervee review of how and whether to proceed with HS2. To read full document - (rh200630) 16 June 2020 - Update. Letter from Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for Railways, on HS2 approaches to Euston and Old Oak Common - (rh200602) Letter Tony Berkeley to Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for Railways on terminating HS2 at Old Oak Common - (rh200617) Jonathan Roberts, train timings approaching Old Oak Common - (rh200616) Chris Stokes, Passenger Dispersal from Old Oak Common as terminal for HS2 (dated 19 September 2019) - (rh190913) 17 May 2020 - Press release - Lord Berkeley, author of the Dissenting Report into HS2 in January of this year, welcomes the Public Accounts Committee report issued today. “I am pleased that Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has taken steps to investigate HS2, but it is clearly not enough. Unfortunately, the report has failed to take into account the even earlier warnings that I, and others, gave the Government several years previously about the cost increases, the many senior whistle blowers who were silenced, and the failures of successive ministers to properly inform Parliament. “HS2 Ltd. and those working on it at the DfT have had no regard for proper process or Parliament. As recently as last month, why did the DfT give the go ahead to begin building HS2 on 15 April 2020 when it must have known about the ongoing PAC review? It is very unlikely that Parliament would have given approval had it been provided with the necessary cost information in a timely manner.” To read the full press release - (rh200517) Press Release 17May 2020 PAC.1. To read the full - Public Accounts Committee Report. 15 April 2020 - Press Release - HS2 – the ultimate £100bn vanity project as GDP forecast to drop by 35%! Comments by Lord Berkeley on the HS2 Phase 1 Go-ahead’ ‘The Government’s giving HS2 the go-ahead at a likely cost of over £50bn flor Phase 1 just a day after the OBR suggested that the UK faced the worst recession for 100 years and a forecast drop in GDP of 35% is certainly well timed to get minimal scrutiny. ‘The accompanying DfT Full Business Case claims that HS2 will help the economy by providing shovel ready work for the construction industry, but fails to acknowledge that there are more and much cheaper rail shovel ready projects which will bring greater benefit to rail users. ‘DfT has also not explained whether the main contractors have agreed to design and build Phase 1 for the latest DfT funding envelope of £45bn, especially when ministers were already saying since March 2019 that the Phase 1 spending envelope was £55bn, similar to the more credible estimate of Michael Byng of £54.5bn quoted in my HS2 Dissenting Report. ‘The Benefits are still based on 17 trains per hour for the whole scheme into Euston, in spite of evidence from around the world that no high-speed lines operate more than 12 to 14. No prudent economist would base a business case on an operation that is not achievable in practice. Elsewhere in the Business Case, the DfT struggles to find even more ambitious benefits to attribute to HS2, including ‘higher foreign investment into the UK’ (2.11). Is t his really dependent on HS2? ‘The DfT accepts that the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) will be affected by the current Corona Virus travel restrictions, but fails to quantify by how much and for how long. However, it reduces the BCR to 0.8 for the Funding Envelope of £40bn (Table 2.4), reducing to 0.7 for 10% less demand. Surely the lower demand is very likely as a result of Corona Virus changing demand? ‘Putting all these together, I believe that the BCR quoted in my Dissenting Report of 0.6 is much more realistic. Fig 2.1 reminds us that a BCR of over 2.0 is ‘good’ and below 1.0 is ‘poor’. ‘At a time of the Corona Virus health and business costs well exceeding those of HS2, it is surprising that ministers are still throwing more good money, our money, after bad. The NHS could clearly benefit from the £billions that could be saved for investments in the NHS and other parts of the UK economy by scrapping HS2, whilst still potentially investing in alternative and much better targeted rail projects listed below. Ministers seem to be keeping their collective heads well in the sand, whilst hoping that the lack of scrutiny due to the Coronal Virus will mean that, by the time they surface with the full knowledge of the UK’s financial situation, it will be too late to stop this unnecessary drain into what remains a massive vanity project.’ Further reading: DfT Full Business Case-High Speed 2 Phase One: (Click here to read the PDF) Tony Berkeley Dissenting Report on HS2 – See below January 2020. 5 April 2020 - Letter to PM saying that Network Rail’s need for £500m of rail construction workers shows that Oakervee was wrong to say that there were no other ‘shovel ready’ projects apart from HS2. (rh200405). Examples of Network Rail’s ‘Shovel Ready Projects’ include the four tracking of the Castlefield Corridor in Manchester which is the cause of much of the rail congestion in the area and which Network Rail reports is one of the few ‘Congested Infrastructure’ projects in the UK; Castlefield Corridor congested infrastructure report in PDF Secondly, the extension to the Midland Main Line electrification is genuinely shovel ready with the existing team soon running out of work. So why does the Department for Transport refuse these vital projects going ahead whilst spending millions on keeping HS2, and its preliminary works contractors who ignore social distances, on life support. 25 March 2020 - Letters to PM and Shapps. (rh20317). 15 March 2020 – letter to HS2 Minister Andrew Stephenson MP on Euston Station and approaches. It asks why HS2 continues to demolish buildings and structures when ministers from the PM downwards have said that HS2’s will no longer be responsible for Euston and it will be subject to a new review to integrate HS2 and Network Rail parts and reduce the overall costs. (rh200311). 10 March 2020 - Key issues arising from the Oakervee Review of HS2; Westminster Energy, Environment and Transport Forum Conference, 10 March 2020. (rh200308). 28 February 2020 – Letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer – HS2- a way forward to save £65bn. This includes the latest cost estimate of HS2 and the alternatives, with a paper ‘Connecting Britain by Rail’ by Robert Goundry, James Mackay and Jim Summers which gives more details of the alternatives providing more capacity and better services than HS2. (rh200226). 11 February 2020 - Oakervee Report published. January 2020 - Tony Berkeley Dissenting Report. A report by Deputy Chair Tony Berkeley setting out his conclusions on the evidence submitted to the Oakervee Review. It concludes that the evidence does not support a decision to proceed. (rh200105). November 2019 – Tony Berkeley’s letter of resignation to Doug Oakervee. (rh191111). August 2019 - Tony Berkeley was Deputy Chairman of the Oakervee Review of HS2. He resigned in November 2020 and published his Dissenting Report in early January 2020. August 2019 - Oakervee Review Terms of Reference. Long and detailed terms of reference for a very short 2 ½ month review. (rh190920). October 2016 - Euston Express, an alternative presented to an HS2 Phase 1 Select Committee in October 2016, provides for a cheaper, more effective and quicker-to-build alternative to HS2’s proposal which would devastate large parts of the area around Euston. Euston Express removed the need for a very deep down construction putting at risk not only the West Coast Main Line tracks into Euston but the adjacent houses, and only needed to deliver the perfection engineering of 18 trains per hour, and needing Crossrail 2 to disperse the increased number of passengers. (rh161012).

Papers and Submissions:

5 April 2024 the debate about the future ferry services continues… 21 March 2024 recording of the Council of the Isle of Scilly (COIS) Scrutiny Committee’s meeting – at which the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company (IOSSG) and Harland and Wolff were separately invited to present their plans for future services. Watch Scrutiny Committee - 20 March 2024 4 April 2024 COIS corrections to IOSSG Statements: View web page. Attachment to above by COIS fs240405 E mail from Tony Berkeley to Ian Howard, Chair, IOSSG: on community interest company idea… Dear Ian, I was interested in your presentation to the Council of the Isles of Scilly’s Scrutiny Committee on 20 th March 2024. I have now listened to the recording of the meeting and, in particular, the comments that you made in seeking to compare your IOSSG Company with a community interest company. I understand that you made a similar statement at the IOSSG 2022 AGM. I have some experience with different CICs and so I feel it necessary to point out to you that, looking at the definitions of a CIC, I suggest that it would be difficult to compare the IOSSG in its present form with a CIC, and is in fact very misleading especially for those who are not familiar with the concept of a CIC. You will find a number of helpful articles on the web about CICs and there is CIC Regulator whose role is set out in - Community interest Companies: leaflets So although the Board may wish the company to be seen as a benefit to the Isles of Scilly community, it order to enable this to happen, I suggest that the following changes would have to be made to the company and its shareholders: 1. Allow Islanders to elect local directors 2. Accept that Government funding comes with strings such as competitive tendering and be willing to make enough concessions to secure it. 3. Not work behind the elected council’s back to get the Levelling Up funding for themselves; 4. Not exclude certain directors from having to face re-election; 5. Definitely put a potential takeover bid to the company’s shareholders. 6. Accept that your company may be in competition with other operators at any time; that the quays are open access under control of the harbourmasters and so operate in a manner that is fair and equitable and without any party running off to complain to the Competition and Market Authority. In your presentation to the Council, you spent a lot of time attacking the potential competition, presumably Harland and Wolff, when you must know by now that the harbours and routes are and always have been open access. Most such transport operators seem to concentrate on advertising the benefits of their services rather than attacking the competition! Your company does not have and never did have monopoly rights to its services. As things stand, I suggest that the Steamship Group is nothing like a community interest company and that you are misleading the public and your shareholders by suggesting that it might be. You could try to convert the structure of the IOSSG to become a CIC but, in so doing, you would have to restrict dividends, open to all on an equitable basis the ability to purchase shares and, most important of all, reach agreement with the community that your company serves, on an ongoing definition of how the company can best serve its community, as well as getting agreement from these bodies on the points I set out above. I am copying this letter to the Council fo the Isles of Scilly as well as to Lord Davies of Gower, the Shipping Minister, and look forward to your comment. Yours Tony November 2023 must watch – downfall sea links! - Click here to watch: Downfall Sea Links 13 th October 2023 – Letter to Council of Isles of Scilly on Sea Link procurement policy and the need for full transparency when a local authority is planning to spend taxpayers money. (fs231013) 23 rd October 2023 – Second letter to Natwest Bank concerning Lombards loan to the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company (IOSSG). Last week, when visiting the Isles of Scilly, Harland & Wolff announced that it expects to be carrying ‘75,000 passengers a year and 10,000 tonnes of freight from next year’. It states that it will do this through the introduction of a new fast ferry service for the summer months and through its acquisition of Kraken Marine Services (KMS)… The company’s announcement to the stock market can be seen here: Click here to view web site. You will be aware that the Council’s Soft Market Test states that the 2022 passenger numbers for this particular route was 110,414 and the freight market demand was around 14,000 tonnes per annum. From this it is evident that Harland & Wolff have the capability and intention to compete with the Isles of Scilly Steamship Company (IOSSG) in a market for which the latter has claimed to be the sole service provider and is, I believe, seeking loans from your Bank on this basis because they do not wish to compete for £48.4m levelling up funding from the Government. Only your Bank can judge whether a loan of over £35m to the IOSSG based a business case of a monopoly provider is sound when there is at least one company already investing to provide competition, which will surely introduce downward pressure on fares and prices. Indeed, the IOSSG’s own year end report said: “We have to recognise that servicing of alternative financing such as secured debt would result in increased fares and freight prices”….(fs231023). 6 October 2023 Letter to Natwest Bank querying whether their proposed loan of £35m to the Isles of Scilly Steamship Group complies with the Bank’s policy on corporate social responsibility since it will be likely to increase ferry fares and charges dramatically. (fs231006). 30 July 2023 The Herald compares the Scilly ferry service with Scottish ferries. What English isles can teach Scotland about crisis ferries - Herald Scotland 20 June 2023 Papers for the Council of Isles of Scilly Full Council meeting on 22 June on progress on the Levelling Up bid for new ferries etc. (Public Pack)Agenda Document for FULL COUNCIL, 22/06/2023 18:00 (scilly.gov.uk) 23 rd April 2023 – discussion on BBC 1 Politics South West. Watch on BBC iPlayer. 20 th April 2023 – speech by Lord Berkeley in House of Lords on Levelling Up agenda for Scilly. Read speech. 20 rd April 2023 – Statement by Council of the Isles of Scilly. (fs230421). 23 rd March 2023 – Letter from Shipping Minister Baroness Vere of Norbiton to the Isles of Scilly Steamship Group rejecting their request for Levelling Up funding to provide 49% of the total funding required for the new vessels etc without the need for competitive tendering. (fs230317). February 2023 – statement by Duchy of Cornwall of support for Council of Isles of Scilly. (fs230420). 12 December 2022 - Isles of Scilly scrutinise Isles of Scilly Steamship Group’s proposals for a new vessel and its funding, with or without the Levelling Up bid funds 8 December 2022. Letter from Tony Berkeley. (fs221212). Listen to the sound recording from The Scrutiny meeting 8 Dec 2022 - ‘Scrutiny ISSG 081222 - Council of the Isle of Scilly (Sea Links Project) 1 November 2022 – letter to Michael Gove, new Levelling Up Secretary of State: I explain why the bid and the thinking behind it is, and remains, doomed to failure, as confirmed by the DfT letter to the Council dated 18 August. The bid sunk because it was fatally flawed (it torpedoed itself). I repeatedly told the Transport Board that its strategy was fatally flawed and eventually the TB sacked me!. It is time for a change of direction if there is to be any reasonable prospect of Government support at a time when public funding is in desperately short supply. (fs221101). 11 October 2022 Letter to Anne Marie Trevelyan MP, S of S for Transport, reminding her of the need to ensure that the Government procurement rules on competition are complied with from an independent sourcing of what the customer wants, to procurement of vessels and operation of the services. (fs221011). 15 August 2022 letter from Robert Courts MP, Minister for Shipping, to Robert Francis, Chair, Council of the Isles of Scilly, .rejecting the Full Business Case submitted by the Council. (fs220915). 10 September 2022. Letter from Tony Berkeley to the Council of the Isles of Scilly offering advice on how to prepare a bid for Government funding that has got more chance of success (fs220910), following ministers rejection of the original bid because the business case did not comply with public contracts regulations and would fall foul of competition rules. See also Update on the Isle of Scilly Links Project See from Cornwall Live 31 August 2022 ‘The Government has told the Council of the Isles of Scilly to rethink its approach to a £48 million project to replace ships which serve the islands. The project to replace ferries and vessels has been earmarked for cash from the Levelling Up fund but the government was unhappy with the approach taken with a business case for the project. the scheme the £48m would be used to buy three new vessels and carry out harbour works which will support the new vessels and accessibility requirements. The current vessels need to be replaced which would not only safeguard the future of the service but could also provide benefits for residents, businesses and visitors. Transport minister Robert Courts has told the council that it needs to rethink the approach as the current business case does not comply with public contracts regulations and could also fall foul of rules around competition. The minister warned that this could result in a legal challenge which could result in a “significant cost” for the council and the Isles of Scilly Steamship Group. Read more: Cornwall to Isles of Scilly link could be transformed with £48m cash Mr Courts said the Government was committed to the project and a development grant would be made available to help complete the work required to draw up a new business case. In his letter to the council he stated: “As we all recognise, the proposed investment marks an important moment for the Isles of Scilly, as it will put in place a new fleet of vessels to maintain these lifeline link services. 28 June 2022: launch of EGNOS: the All Party Parliamentary Group on General Aviation (APPG-GA) launched its report on ‘The Value for Money for a Temporary Reinstatement of EGNOS’, which has been prepared by Oxera Consulting, the Oxford based business consultants. It demonstrates the benefits of EGNOS to passengers, operators and airlines on routes to remote communities such as the Outer Hebrides and the Isles of Scilly, as well as to the aviation, agriculture and maritime sectors. For every £1 spent by Government, the benefits are calculated to be £2.60. Termination of the EGNOS -Safety of Life Service, has had a significant effect on the ability of both commercial and private aviation to operate safely in inclement weather conditions, and has resulted in loss of revenue to smaller airports already suffering economic hardship. We are urging ministers to reinstate EGNOS on a temporary basis until their preferred UK satellite system is operational. Customers, operators and other stakeholders are urged to contact ministers and their Members of Parliament in support of this campaign. (x220701), (x220629) 29 June 2022: Levelling Up Bid by the Council of the Isles of Scilly for new ships. My letter to Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Leadership Board in response to the comments reported in the media of Cllr Robert Francis’ criticism of delay and criticising the Treasury. I suggest that there is no emergency, there are short term alternatives available and that the Council should start again with a new specification and put all the work out to tender, as government procurement rules require. (fs220629). Isles of Scilly Council concerned that £48m new ships project could be delayed by a year. Click here to read full story. 13 June 2022 Letter to Robert Francis, Chairman, Council of the Isles of Scilly (COIS), copied to Robert Courts MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary at Department for Transport, suggesting an alternative to the stalled bid by the COIS applying for some £45m of taxpayer funds for a new ferry for the current monopoly provider of sea ferry services, the Isles of Scilly Steamship Group, without any competitive tender. The letter suggests that the COIS should abandon its current bid under the Levelling Up programme, and request instead a smaller sum to enable them to employ consultants to prepare a compliant bid for a new ferry and services to be tendered out completely independent of any operator – for service provision, costs and provision of new craft – if they want significant taxpayers’ funds. I held a useful meeting with Robert Courts on 17 May for an exchange of views. Robert Francis has commented ‘Please make clear in any meeting that this is not my current position (for reasons fully explained to you ) and that you are representing your own views, not mine , the Council's or the Transport Board.’ (fs220506), (fs210118) 6 January 2022 Letter from Bns Vere in response to Tony Berkeley’s letter of 2 January 2021. (fs220106) 2 January 2022 Letter to Bns Vere, Transport Minister, on Levelling Up bid for transport improvements to isles of Scilly, and the need for competitive bidding. (fs220102) 27 th November 2021: Letter Tony Berkeley to Ian Howard, Chair, Isles of Scilly Steamship Group (fs211127) explaining how the competition issue might be addressed. 18 th November 2021: Letter from Baroness Vere Transport Minister dated 18 November 2021 replying to letter to Michael Gove. (fs211115) 23 rd October 2021. Letter to Levelling Up Minister, Michael Gove MP on the Levelling up bid. (fs211023). Tony Berkeley’s name was removed from the Transport Board by the Chairman, Derek Thomas MP. Correspondence below refers. 9 July 2021. Letter Tony Berkeley to Derek Thomas MP in reply: I am unable to continue my involvement in a project which, in my opinion, has compromised the interests of islanders and the future of the Islands’ economy by caving in to the interests of private sector stakeholders through maintenance of the status quo and limiting opportunities for competition to decide the future transport solution. (fs210709) 1 July 2021. Derek Thomas MP to Tony Berkeley. ‘With immediate effect I am removing your name from the Local Transport Board…’ (fs210625) 25 June 2021. Fear of being overrun by visitor cars on St Mary’s with RoRo. Some have expressed fear that RoRo will open up St Mary’s to floods of visitor cars. There is a solution – The Council could introduce laws or prohibition orders as has been done at Eigg. Muck and Knoydart, the small Isles in Scotland. (fs210405) also see (fs210406). 24 June 2021 Letter to Shipping Minister about Council of the Isles of Scilly Levelling Up bid. The letter suggests that a better service and lower prices could be achieved by having one Roll on Roll off ship rather than two using out of date cranes and pallets. (fs210621 and fs210622) 20 June 2021. FRIST’s summary of passenger numbers and fares comparison. This shows the number of passengers and fares between the mainland and the Isles of Scilly by different modes 2002 to the present. (fs210420) 6 April 2021. Levelling Up Fund. As a member of the FRIST (FRIENDS of Isles of Scilly Transport) Tony has long campaigned for an improved ferry services to and from the mainland. See Friends of Isles of Scilly Transport | Facebook In early March the Government announced a new fund ‘Levelling Up Fund’ which seems tailor made for an application for funding for a new Scillonian ferry and improvement to the passenger and freight facilities at Penzance and St Mary’s. Applications for funding have to be made by the local Council (Council of the Isles of Scilly) with the support of the local MP, Derek Thomas. Closing date for the first round is mid-June 2021. We hope that the Council will lead a bid to cover the vessels and shore facilities. If successful, then the Council will also have a role in specifying fares, charges, timetables etc. Tony Berkeley is pressing hard for a Roll On Roll Off solution to be adopted rather than the old Lift On Lift Off system. He is advised by Bill Davidson, Ex Calmac. See Bill’s paper on RoRo in Scotland. (fs201210) More details in the FIRST Newsletter Spring 2021 (fs210406)

Gallery

Some Pictures from my history with the Rail Industy.