Dear editor,
The Transport Select Committee did not hear evidence from their East West Rail project witnesses so much as it heard side-stepping and prevarication. No clearly defined examples of cross-governmental working between EWR, DHLUC or DfT were provided or even given
as anecdote.
Read: “Community involvement very important” EWR boss tells Transport Committee
They did sit next to each other though! Maybe that’s something. It should be noted that the phrase “unlocking growth” was used with full force and without merit. And most importantly – East West Rail provided unsubstantiated evidence on how they are working with local communities.
The experience in Bedford does not reflect their claims.
It is well documented that the costs of building East West Rail outweigh any benefits to be achieved. The last business case for East West Rail demonstrated poor value for taxpayers.
The National Audit Office report on EWR revealed the existence of a secret HM Treasury officer led EWR economic growth board. At the TSC, Dame Bernadette Kelly the DfT Permanent Secretary said it was “very hard to work out a business case (for EWR) up front.”
And that the EWR growth board was only now exploring how the project would deliver the economic benefits of the railway.
From the (lack of) evidence given at the TSC, it remains very unclear what discussions, if any, have been held between the EWR Economic Growth Board, the Department for Levelling Up Housing and Communities (DLUHC) or the Treasury regarding the housing development targets being met by the East West Rail project.
So we are no further along in understanding exactly how EWR is running (or will run) a cross-governmental infrastructure project will unlock £103B other than being loosely told that EWR is a housing and Cambridge Science Park employment project masquerading as an
infrastructure project.
But, let’s carry on with blighting entire towns and communities along the route, shall we? EWR at what cost? And to whom?
£8B+ of our taxpayer money is being spent on the EWR project.
It remains unclear how much it will actually cost since a comprehensive financial assessment of CS3 Bedford to Cambridge (Route E) construction cost does not exist.
How much to reconstruct the Bedford Hospital parking area with a multi-storey car park?
How much to reconstruct four major bridges through Bedford town? How much to purchase and demolish whole neighbourhoods in Poets and Ashburnham?
How much to mitigate against further Ouse [sic] flooding issues? How much to build embankments, viaducts and tunnels through the hilly
and clay North Bedfordshire and South Cambridgeshire countryside?
What’s in it for Bedford?
Not a lot. Bedford Borough is estimated to gain 14M per annum increased gross value add as a result of the East West Rail project. This equates to less than £80 per person per year in the Borough and it should ring alarm bells for all residents given the blight we have
suffered and will continue to suffer for the next decade.
What Evidence do we have that the EWR project is failing?
The East West Rail project to date does not achieve the government’s stated strategic transport objectives. The project:
- Fails to plan and provide electrified rail transport from the inception.
- Fails to provide transparent consideration and analysis of environmental impacts for
the railway construction and operation, including the use of embedded carbon in
analysis of route choice for CS3 (Bedford to Cambridge). - Fails to define how the project will unlock economic growth through housing growth
as directly tied into the local government planning process. - Fails to define multi-modal transport plans for local communities to access EWR
stations from the population centres.
And, most importantly, the EWR project:
- Fails to properly engage local communities in the railway planning process and define how communities will benefit.
The Bedford EWR Local Representative Groups (LRGs) are Failing
The EWR Chief Executive was quick off the mark yesterday to claim how “successful” their Local Representative groups were in working with local communities. The evidence on the ground is vastly different. Below is a summary of how blighted communities continue to suffer at the hands of East West Rail.
Bedfordshire Parish Councils LRG
Beth West states in the recent EWR PR exercise that local communication “is something that is extremely important” and that there are “15 local representative groups across the region.”
Our experience says that these LRG meetings are a ‘tick-box’ exercise for EWR. In addition, there are not 15 LRGs, EWR are consolidating groups – make it more difficult for communities to be heard and have their concerns addressed and their questions answered.
Examples of the serious EWR local engagement issues include:
- They refuse to provide a business case despite being repeatedly asked.
- They sidestep or fail to answer questions on their own ‘first mile-last mile’ case,
- they have had a continuous changing of staff. None of their LRG ‘team’ are from the original meetings.
- The staff in attendance are often clueless members of the PR team offering little information regarding planning, construction and operation of the railway through Bedfordshire.
- They do not answer questions at the meetings, they merely parrot out from their pre-prepared notes.
A recent example of the poor the LRG meeting process: In May 2023 Beth West promised to provide a plan of Highways England proposed black cat works with alignment 1 including the Tempsford variant to our LRG, in December 2023 a plan was provided but it was illegible, in
January 2024 Sarah Rhodes EWR’s LRG coordinator promised to provide a clearer plan as of march 2024 this has yet to materialise.
Poets and Ashburnham Neighbourhoods (Represented by Bedford Town LRG)
Bedford town LRG meetings are marked by inconsistent attendance, inadequate or failing communication and little follow-up with questions raised. The blighted neighbourhoods of Poets and Ashburnham are lumped in with the rest of the town, giving little weight to their significant concerns and issues raised.
The list of Bedford Town LRG issues:
- Despite repeated requests, LRGs remain unrecorded with disagreement between Councillors and EWR regarding who objects.
- Minutes are consistently released over a month after the meeting and disputed by councillors.
- All requests for information are now treated as FoIs with a minimum of 20 working days to respond.
- Homeowners had to raise an FoI to find out how EWR had determined their previously at risks homes were now ‘safe’ despite zero in person surveying the structures. Despite raising the question many times at ‘drop-in’ events and via email.
On behalf of,
Nicola Gribble, Renhold and Ravensden Ward and Renhold Parish Council
Brent Fielder, Wilden Parish Council
Justin Griffiths, Roxton Parish Council
Gordon Johnston Wyboston, Chawston, Colesdon Parish Council
Martin Yemm, Wyboston, Chawston, Colesdon Parish Council
John Mabberley, Ravensden Parish Council
Julia Virdee, Protect Poets
Rachel Duke, BFARe
Letters published do not reflect the views of the Bedford Independent. If you
would like to respond to any issues raised, please email
letters@bedfordindependent.co.uk.
