Aylesbury Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Candidate Steven Lambert has raised concerns over the proposed route of the High Speed 2 route put forward by the Labour Government last week.

Commenting Steven said, “although I recognise that rail must be a more viable alternative to the environmentally damaging third runaway at Heathrow, and major investment in the rail network is welcomed, I fail to see how new passenger traffic will be generated from a line starting in Euston will reduce the volume of internal flights and transfers as it is not connecting to Heathrow.  Clearly lacking, and would make the plan viable, is the right air, station and population connections.

I also note that the plans are several years away from delivery and that the route proposed given the state of the economy and that with both the Conservatives and the Labour party arguing about cuts in public spending that the plans may falter.

In contrast, to the statements against the proposals last week by Tory MP David Lidington, the Conservatives have stated that they plan to move “faster and further” with high speed rail, with a two year earlier starting date for construction, in effect shortening the consultation period. Therefore I challenge David Lidington to answer the question on whether a future Conservative government commit to changing the route away from the Chilterns and whether they will shorten the consultation period??”

Labour want to plough through our backyard and areas of outstanding natural beauty and  the Tories want to rush this through without giving anyone a say. Labour say they will listen to you but clearly won’t and the Tories aren’t even interested in listening at all.

Steven added “rather than playing cheap shot politics over such an important matter to all of us, I would urge everyone to review the plans and take part fully in the planned public consultation which is due to start this autumn. This process could take up to 7 years to complete but people should have their say as soon as possible.”

The route proposed is indicative but will have severe environmental impacts by going through the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, – the only such designated area between London and Birmingham, Wendover and Aylesbury, putting at risk historic parkland and National Trust land at Hartwell House. Also at risk are our fragile eco systems and our shared enjoyment of the countryside and history.  We therefore have to make sure that our voice is heard loud and clear in the consultation when it happens.”

Steven is to meet with Lib Dem Shadow Transport minister, Norman Baker shortly to discuss the matter further.

Steven Lambert, using CO2 free transport

Liberal Democrat Spring Conference today backed plans to increase the threshold at which people start paying income tax from current levels to £10,000.

These plans would see the average person’s income tax bill cut by £700. Pensioners would be £100 better off and 3.6m people would no longer have to pay any income tax at all.

The party’s tax plans will be paid for by closing tax loopholes, making polluters pay and introducing a ‘mansion tax’ on homes worth over £2m.

Commenting, Liberal Democrat Shadow Chancellor, Vince Cable said:

“It’s high time that this country had a tax system that is fair for all.

“Gordon Brown created a tax system that has some of the lowest earners paying hundreds of pounds in taxes that they can ill afford while the very wealthiest treat tax as if it’s optional.

“For their part, the Tories flail around in confusion over their marriage tax plans and can only commit to a tax cut for millionaires.

“The Liberal Democrat plans are the most radical, far reaching tax reforms in a generation and embody everything that we stand for: fairness, protecting the environment, rewarding hard work.

“It is right to ask those with the broadest shoulders to bear a little more of the burden so that millions of people on normal earnings get the break they need.

“We all know that the country is in for some tough times ahead. But we believe that it is simply not possible to address the problem of an unsustainable budget deficit without parallel action to rebalance the tax system and eliminate the unfairness at its core.”

11 Mar 2010 : Column 452, 453 Norman Baker (Lewes) (LD):

I thank the Minister for today’s welcome statement. Britain has trailed behind Europe for a long time on high speed rail. I also very much welcome the fact that something for which we have been calling for years-long before the Conservatives, while they were still winning the cold war-has finally been brought forward by the Government.

Can the Minister confirm that the Government’s high speed rail scheme will provide extra capacity for the railways, enable modal shift from air, and help economic development in the regions? Will he also confirm that it will be very popular, as I think it will be, given the enormous response to the Javelin trains in the south-east?

I acknowledge the cross-party attempts by the Secretary of State to involve all parties in the House in a constructive dialogue on the issue and to make it a national project. I thank the Minister for the access I have had to HS2 and for the private briefing the Secretary of State gave me a few weeks ago, which for some reason the Conservatives apparently rejected.

Does the Minister agree that we are talking about a matter of national importance that requires consensus in the House, and that all parties ought to approach it in that way? Does he therefore share my concern at the Conservatives’ attempt to create a kind of synthetic candy-floss row, rather than trying to move forward in a sensible, constructive way? They appear to be putting short-term politics before the long-term interests of the country, which brings into question their commitment to high speed rail.

Will the Minister acknowledge that funding is a difficult issue, given the current state of the public finances? Will he consider the suggestion put forward by my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Dr. Cable), the Lib Dem shadow Chancellor-the construction of a national infrastructure bank, perhaps using pension funds, which will help to guarantee stability in the funding for such major national projects?

Does the Minister also agree that it is important when such projects are under way that there should be no cuts in existing rail budgets that are designed to promote the network in other ways for passengers? Will he give an undertaking-as my party will, and as all parties should-that other rail budgets will not be raided to pay for high speed rail?

I congratulate HS2 on producing a route that, I think, minimises environmental damage while maximising the usefulness of the line. Obviously the route is a matter for consultation, but what we have now is a useful start for consultation purposes. Can the Minister also confirm that there is a long-term commitment to get to Scotland, and not simply with high speed trains on conventional lines but with a high speed network? Does he have any idea when that will feature in the time scale of the current project?

Will the Minister say something about the link between HS2 and HS1, which he referred to obliquely in his statement? It is important that people should be able to get to Paris and Brussels directly from Manchester and Birmingham, without having to change in London.

Lastly, does he accept that if the route goes through Heathrow, there will be a 15-minute penalty for those coming to London from Birmingham or Manchester, which would be severely disadvantageous for the economics of high speed rail?

11 Mar 2010 : Column 450 and 451Mrs. Theresa Villiers (Chipping Barnet) (Con):

I thank the Minister for advanced sight of the statement. Less than three years ago, the then Secretary of State for Transport stood at the Dispatch box and presented a 30-year strategy for the railways that had no place for high speed rail. The Conservative party refused to accept that because we believe it is vital to start catching up with the high speed revolution on which much of the rest of Europe embarked more than a generation ago.

The Conservative party totally transformed the debate with our promise to build a north-south high speed rail line as the first step towards the creation of a national network connecting major cities across England, Scotland and Wales.

Ever since then, the Government have been running to catch up with the lead we have set and the momentum we have generated. So we welcomed Labour’s change of heart on high speed rail with their establishment of HS2, but we made it clear that we regretted the fact that the remit they gave to HS2 lacked ambition and focused only on the west midlands as stage 1, whereas we want to go further and faster with our guaranteed, costed and timetabled commitment to take high speed rail to Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds-as that crucial first step to a national network. The second step should, of course, be a connection with Scotland.

We need to test Labour’s last-minute conversion to high speed rail with some searching questions. Will they match our commitment to start work immediately on taking the line beyond Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds, as part of stage 1? Will they set a timetable, as we have done, for delivering a line to the north? Why will they not match our commitment to start construction by 2015?

What guarantees can they give that fares will be kept within the reach of ordinary families on modest incomes? Will they match our promise to review the blight rules to see whether we can do more to help those affected by whichever route is ultimately chosen? And will they guarantee that the communities affected will have the chance to make their voices heard?

Let me make it clear that we are not prepared blindly to accept the route that Labour propose, and let me also say that when it comes to Heathrow, Labour still does not get it. If we are to get the full environmental
benefits of high speed rail, it is crucial that we make it as easy as possible for people to switch from the plane to the train, with the carbon benefits involved. It was a major setback when HS2’s chairman confirmed that modal shift from air was not to be a key objective in its report. Now we know that the closest HS2’s proposals will get to Heathrow is about 10 miles away, at Old Oak Common.

Although we do not rule out use of that site for dispersal, the idea that some kind of “Wormwood Scrubs international” station is the best rail solution for Heathrow is just not credible. It is bizarre that the party elected on a mantra of delivering an integrated transport system is proposing to leave our most important airport out of an upgrade to our transport network that, under Conservative plans, would become the most important for half a century.

At the eleventh hour, however, we have the promise that the Government will think again about the points we have been making for years about the importance of integrating Heathrow with high speed rail. We therefore welcome their decision to appoint Lord Mawhinney to try to find a solution that will command the cross-party consensus we all want.

Although the Conservative party is part of the growing consensus backing high speed rail, we are adamant that Britain’s high speed solution must be the right one for the environment and for the economy.
In leaving out Heathrow and setting out plans that do not give costed, timetabled and watertight guarantees to take the line north of the midlands, Labour’s plans are flawed, lack credibility and are undermined by their inability to grasp the basic truth: that high speed rail should be an alternative, not an addition, to a third runway.

The decisions we make now will have a profound impact on our transport system for generations to come, and I can assure the House that a Conservative Government would have the energy, leadership and values to deliver high speed rail’s full potential for this country.

Aylesbury Liberal Democrats are heading to their spring conference in Birmingham later this week hoping it will be a springboard to success in the coming General Election.

Leading the team of those attending is Lib Dem Prospective Parliamentary Candidate, Steven Lambert who is aiming to become the MP for the Aylesbury Constituency, which includes Aston Clinton, Wendover, Stokenchruch and all of Aylesbury in the General Election, which is due in just a few weeks’ time. 

Steven said “this weekend I will be meeting Party Leader Nick Clegg and will be discussing with him the issues that are really important to residents in the Aylesbury Constituency, such as the closure of Rayners Hedge Brain Injury Rehab Unit, I will also be meeting our Shadow Chancellor Vince Cable to discuss the impact on of the job losses at HBOS  and of the Liberal Democrats’ plans to ensure no one pays tax on the first £10,000 of income.  I know in our area, thousands of people on low and middle incomes will benefit from this tax cut.I also plan to meet our Shadow Home Secretary Chris Huhne to talk to him about issues of policing in after the launch of the Safer Streets policy a couple of weeks ago which confirmed  the Liberal Democrats commitment to ensuring 3000 more police officers to help make our streets safer.” 

Steven Continued “I have spoken to many local residents and there is a strong view that we need more local police officers patrolling our streets. Within weeks, voters will get the chance to decide on who their new MP will be. We are looking forward to the campaign with confidence and will be looking forward to the General Election where the Tory majority is just 7000 and that means we have a real chance of returning a Lib Dem MP for Aylesbury to Parliament.”

Steven Lambert talking with Police Community Support Officers about crime issues

Liberal Democrats in Aylesbury have set out their General Election plans to put more police on the beat throughout the constituency. The extra officers for Aylesbury will be funded by the savings from scrapping ID cards, and are part of the Liberal Democrats’ Safer Streets – More and Better Police manifesto commitment.

Lib Dem Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Aylesbury said “People in Aylesbury are often telling me how they feel unsafe. Expensive ID cards aren’t going to change that, but an extra officer walking down Elm Farm Road or more police in the Town Centre on a Friday night will. The Liberal Democrats are committed to more police, and this is the only way to create safer streets.”

Recently a Thames Valley Police survey revealed that people would be happy to see their council tax go up to pay for more policing. The Lib Dem policy would negate the need to do this as we would be scrapping large expensive government projects to fund the extra police. With 4189 officers – which increased by 5.5% last year, we have a detection rate of just 24% or 15% arrests per officer.

Steven added “as Aylesbury is set to grow by thousands of homes, we need to make sure we get the police numbers we need. The Lib Dem plans would bring that to fruition along with an elected Police Authority local priorities could be set by local people for the area.”

Commenting at the launch of the nation al policy on 4th February, Liberal Democrat Leader Nick Clegg said “the Liberal Democrats are the only party that wants to cut crime by putting more police on the street. When only one in a hundred crimes ends up with a conviction in court, it is time for things to change. Labour and the Conservatives may talk tough but they are unwilling to make the crucial decisions to cut crime.”

Arrests and Detections

Police Numbers Per Force

Safer Streets More and Better Police

Liberal Democrats launch High Street plan

Liberal Democrats in Aylesbury have this week set out plans to revitalise Britain’s high streets, protect the future of the Post Office, and help small businesses establish and grow in a fairer marketplace.

The announcement comes as research shows one in eight shops is now empty after the recession. The report, published by the Local Data Company (LDC), says that vacancies shot up by 24% in the second half of 2009.

Steven Lambert, Lib Dem Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Aylesbury said “the report shows that in Aylesbury 9.9% of High Street shops are empty, ranking it 8th lowest in the region. The financial crisis has exposed Labour and the Conservatives’ folly of being entirely dependent on the City of London. The Liberal Democrats understand that it will be small businesses that are key to building a healthy and balanced economy.”

Cllr Alan Sherwell, the Lib Dem leader at Aylesbury Vale District Council said “we need a thriving high street in Aylesbury, one with real character that allows local businesses to survive and grow. For instance this is why the Lib Dems have raised concerns over the Asda super store application at Stoke Mandeville Hospital.

Even before the credit crunch hit, small independent shops had more or less disappeared from our high street, the Government’s skewed planning system has seen supermarket giants squeeze the life out of towns like ours and now almost every high street in Britain is an identical collection of chain stores and coffee shops.

Commenting at the national launch, the Lib Dem leader, Nick Clegg, said thriving high streets are at the heart of local communities. But it has been our high streets that have borne the brunt of this recession, with boarded up shops scarring towns and villages across Britain. I believe that people value the wide range of goods and services available locally and want to see their high streets thrive and prosper.”

Background information

1. The document includes proposals to

• Encourage the development of a PostBank and free the Post Office from the Royal Mail to enable it to develop new business
• Introduce a local competition test for all planning applications for new retail developments to establish a fairer balance between local independent stores and large supermarkets
• Establish a system of Local Enterprise Funds and regional stock exchanges to ensure small businesses get access to cost effective equity that meets their needs

2. A copy of Vibrant Local High Streets is attached.

3. A copy of the LDC report into high street vacancies is attached.

Vibrant_Local_High_Streets

LDC-End-Year-Report-2009-FINAL

At a meeting of the full Aylesbury Vale District Council the Tories unveiled their ideas for the 2010/11 budget, they artificially capped the increase in Council Tax to 1.95% or 5p/week, as a result of this temporary measure the following services will be cut:

- Introducing charges for pre-planning advice, this means that you will have to pay to talk to your planning department.

- Making a reduction in the amount of funding to voluntary and community groups, this will hit the most at need in the area, services such as Relate, Citizens Advice Bureau, the Southcourt and Walton Court community project.

- Removing council funding from events such as Parklife and Buckingham Festival Fortnight, this will have a massive effect on tourism, leaving the parish council to pick up the cost if these events are to continue.

- Removing funding from the Reflex Gym in Winslow and the Buckingham Tourist Information Centre, at a time when the local economy needs tourists and the country is facing an obesity crisis these cuts can only cause harm in our area.

District Councillor and Liberal Democrat Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Aylesbury, Cllr Steven Lambert said, “These cuts particularly to the voluntary groups will have a massive effect on those most in need, the Tories seem to be taking the view that as this section of the population do not vote Tory that it doesn’t matter if they cut the funding, that view is simply unacceptable”.

Cllr Steven Kennell the Liberal Democrat finance spokesman added “The Liberal Democrats asked that a small amount be taken from reserves to allow funding of the voluntary groups to continue, the fact that the Tories voted against this just shows how detached they are from reality, they can afford a new theatre, a new council chamber, but anything that relates to the lives of the people of our area they simply do not get”.

Other measures to fill the hole in the AVDC budget include charging villages for public toilets and an increase in car parking charges. Speaking about the effect on Aylesbury Town Cllr Mark Willis, Town Councillor for Bedgrove, said “Increasing car parking charges will drive away visitors from shopping in the town, to our rivals MK and Oxford, the Tories have the money to leave the Kingsbury water feature on all day and night, and to put flagpoles up at the parks, but supporting our local shops seems to be beyond them”.

The Liberal Democrat amendment calling for £39,000 to be taken from reserves to protect the work of the voluntary groups was defeated by the Tories, but one of their councillors later remarked that he would have voted in favour if he had realised exactly what the amendment was calling for.

Notes for editors
Steven Lambert PPC for Aylesbury can be contacted on 07884428833 for interviews.
The budget for AVDC is £20.7 million, £8.8 million is raised through the Council Tax

“The Liberal Democrats are the only party committed to increasing police numbers of every area of the country,” said the Liberal Democrat Shadow Home Secretary.

Commenting on figures showing the number of police officers has fallen in most forces, Chris Huhne said:

“This is a worrying sign of what is to come as budgets are cut and numbers fall in over half of all police forces.

“Instead of squandering billions on ID cards, the Government should concentrate on getting more police officers out on the beat.

“The Liberal Democrats are the only party committed to increasing police numbers of every area of the country. It is time for the other parties to come clean about their plans.”

Aylesbury Liberal Democrats were horrified to learn of the planned closure of Rayners Hedge neurology rehabilitation unit in Croft Road Aylesbury, and are set to fight the move by Buckinghamshire Health Trust.

Lib Dem Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Aylesbury, Steven Lambert, said, Whilst we all understand the pressures on the NHS to make savings in the current economic climate, axing this vital services will impact on the most vulnerable residents of our town. The closure of Rayners Hedge will mean that many people who already find travel a challenge will have to go to Amersham to get essential treatment and support.  This will be traumatic for those who are part way through a course of treatment at the time of closure and make life harder for future patients too.

If Rayners Hedge was uneconomic to run because it did not have enough patients I could understand why they would consider closing it, but it’s a purpose built small personal environment which is vital for rehabilitation. In addition it employs about 30 local people directly and many more indirectly. This is yet another example of cost over care and it’s not right.”

Aylesbury Lib Dems are launching a campaign to save the Rayners Hedge unit with a petition to the Prime Minister via the Number 10 Downing Street website and I would urge everyone to sign the petition and help save this small but essential rehabilitation unit.

To sign the petition go to http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Braininjury/ or go to our Facebook site to find out more information at http://bit.ly/685TNr or contact our campaign team on 01296 395 511 for more details.