Rebecca Johnson is the Green Party's featured candidate today

Rebecca Johnson is today' s featured candidate on the Green Party national website LINK

 I reproduce the post here: 

In the run up to the General Election we will be giving you the opportunity to get to know some of our candidates. Our key candidates and spokespeople can be found here.

This year we will be standing in over 90% of seats in England and Wales.

Our featured candidate for Hampstead and Kilburn: Rebecca Johnson 

Rebecca Johnson at Saturday's Save NHS Petition presentation

Why are you standing as a candidate?

I'm a feminist peace activist committed to participatory democracy. After joining the Greens I supported getting Caroline Lucas into Westminster and canvassed on behalf of other smart, committed Greens standing for local councils and the European Parliament. So when I was asked to put my name forward this time, how could I say no?

What are your top 3 priorities if elected?

1) Transforming British democracy. It makes me so sad to hear voters in Hampstead and Kilburn say after a hustings that they think I'd make the best MP, they love how I argue for the Green Party's joined-up policies across all issues, but they feel they have to vote for another candidate as it's a marginal seat and they don't want a Tory MP. British politics alienates more people than it engages, especially young people, because under the stale 'first-past-the-post' system, most of us feel that our votes don't count. So we need genuine proportional representation – constituency-based single transferable votes for the House of Commons. We should lower the voting age to 16, and of course replace the unelected House of Lords with a proportionally-elected and much more effective Second Chamber.

2) Tackling homelessness and poverty here, notably in parts of Kilburn. That means ending the scandal of empty houses, reforming Council tax banding and investing in genuinely affordable social housing, and bringing in legislation so that the private rental sector is better controlled to provide fair rents, better accommodation and more secure tenancies.

3) Scrapping Trident and putting the billions we would save into our real security needs, such as a truly world class NHS, lifelong education opportunities, and protecting our planet from the biggest security threat of all, humanity's pollution and climate change.

What made you want to get into politics?

I've been engaged in British and UN politics as a feminist peace activist for many years, promoting equality, social justice, disarmament and environmental responsibility. I lived for five years at the Greenham Common Women's Peace Camp to get rid of one generation of nuclear weapons, and then for Greenpeace to ban nuclear testing. Successful in both, but we still have to scrap Trident and build security without nuclear weapons. I decided to join the Green Party in 2009, when I could no longer fool myself that Labour would transform itself into an effective socialist party with the courage to tackle climate change, nuclear disarmament, poverty and homelessness.

What are your favourite things about the constituency?

I love the community spirit here, from parishioners in South Kilburn and Queens Park determined to stop HS2 from destroying their homes and schools, to Belsize Park residents and shopkeepers campaigning to defend their local jobs and shops against Tesco and its identikit, low-pay, profit-first model. And I love cycling to Hampstead Heath and swimming in the women's pond... an oasis of bliss while busy london fades into the background!

Who is your political hero?

Sylvia Pankhurst – the socialist suffragette committed to practical activism on behalf of London's poor, especially hardworking women from British and immigrant communities in the East End. She was feminist, courageous in her commitment to peace, and worked closely with Keir Hardie, Labour's first MP, in breaking the Tory-Liberal two-party stranglehold. From Greenham onwards, I've worn the green, purple and white ribbons of the suffragettes. We must honour their struggle for the vote by refusing to throw our precious democracy away in "tactical" voting for the "least worst" of today's inadequate TweedleCon and TweedleLab parties and their short term political machines. Our votes can bring in the transformational policies this country and our planet need.

Newly selected Green candidate for Hampstead and Kilburn pledges support for railway renationalisation

Camden and Brent Green Parties today announced that international security expert Dr Rebecca Johnson has been selected to stand as the Green Party Parliamentary Candidate for the Hampstead and Kilburn constituency.

Rebecca with Shahrar Ali, Green Party deputy leader

Rebecca is co-chair of Compass Greens, and Vice President of CND. With a PhD from the University of London (LSE), she is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, and works on international security with the UN. She used to live in Kilburn, and now lives in Hackney, but has continued to cycle to Hampstead Heath, where she loves to walk and swim.

Rebecca said:

I got to know this constituency when I volunteered for Glenda Jackson's campaign in 1992. I've been talking to local people in recent weeks, and have heard them highlight the need for more affordable housing, finding environmentally sustainable alternatives to the dam nonsense that will protect both Hampstead Heath and homes from flooding, and defending local businesses and homes against the folly of HS2, while supporting the renationalisation of our rail services, on which so many of us depend.

In standing for the Greens, I will work for these goals and a raft of other policies to protect our environment and secure fair distribution of resources to help all of London's communities, especially our most disadvantaged citizens.

Natalie Bennett, Green Party Leader and candidate for the neighbouring Holborn and St Pancras constituency said:

Throughout Camden voters are looking for a credible alternative to the three business-as-usual parties, and Rebecca will be a brilliant new Green voice for Hampstead and Kilburn.  With record results across Camden and Brent in the local elections this year, and Rebecca as our candidate, we're confident that we will inspire voters from across Hampstead and Kilburn that we have the policies people need.

Three candidates contested the selection and the results were declared to local Green Party members on Sunday. Greens select candidates under the single transferrable vote system, and Rebecca secured 36% of votes in the first round, equal with Brent Green Party’s Scott Bartle and ahead of Islington Green Party member Benali Hamdache. She was declared the winner with 63% of the total after second preferences were reallocated.

The process of selection of Green party candidates for Brent Central, Brent North, Harrow East and Harrow West began this weekend and the result will be known in October.

Another regeneration scheme, another extension of Mayoral powers and another kick in the face for local democracy

Guest blog by Nic Lane on behalf of Brent Housing Action LINK and the Radical Housing Network LINK

Last week the members of Brent’s Citizen Panel were sent the following email:

“The Mayor of London Boris Johnson has recently outlined proposals to transform Old Oak and Park Royal into a thriving new district with up to 24,000 new homes and more than 55,000 jobs.

As part of this long term plan, the Mayor intends to create a new Mayoral Development Corporation (MDC) to unlock the enormous regeneration potential of this 950 hectares of industrial land at Old Oak Common and Park Royal in West London.

Please click here to find out more and to take part in the online consultation on Old Oak - Mayor's Development Corporation.

The consultation will run until Wednesday, 24 September 2014.”  

Residents are strongly urged to read the documentation that the link leads to; this is another classic example of BoJo's "monolith-o-maniacal" desire to stamp his personality all over London with a series of regeneration schemes and so-called iconic buildings in his run up to become PM (or possibly another Caesar given his latinate leanings).

It is only a couple of months ago that BoJo was publicly reprimanded in the London Assembly LINK for overusing his ability to veto the wishes of local government planning departments - even when these pet projects are in direct contravention of his own "London Plan" LINK Tulip Siddiq, Labour’s prospective 2015 parliamentary candidate for Hampstead and Kilburn, revealed at last Wednesday’s Swiss Cottage Action Group this looks very likely to happen again in the case of the development at 100 Avenue Road LINK due to the height of the proposed building.

The formation of the proposed Mayoral Development Corporation will create a nasty precedent which will give him further legal powers to ignore the wishes of any local democratic organisations, be they Councils or residents groups. This is made clear in the documentation:

“Within Old Oak and Park Royal, the Mayor intends for the new Corporation to take on powers relating to infrastructure, regeneration, land acquisitions including Compulsory Purchase Orders, adopting streets, and business and financial support. In addition, the Corporation would also take over planning powers from the London boroughs of Brent, Ealing and Hammersmith & Fulham. The Corporation would lead on preparing the local plans and determining large planning applications submitted within this area.” LINK

Even worse, this plan creates a noxious local parallel to the hugely under-reported Infrastructure Bill that is currently before Parliament. This bill - which is comparable to the Enclosure Acts in its land grabbing intent - allows for 90% of local authority "brownfield sites" to be parcelled out and sold on by the Homes and Communities Agency without reference to any other planning agency decisions or the wishes of the local residents. More information about this Bill can be found here LINK and here LINK 

It's also worth noting that the potency of the claim that the development will create "24,000 homes and 55,000 jobs" currently has all the strength of an homoeopathic remedy; there is no trace evidence of the type of homes or jobs the scheme will create. It's all a construct of BoJo's feverish imagination and desire to attract foreign investment to the Capital LINK a sales pitch for a quack panacea for London's ills. This is the description of how Old Oak will be transformed:

“... the Government has announced proposals for a new High Speed 2 (HS2) and Crossrail station at Old Oak by 2026, potentially making it one of the best connected railway stations in the UK. This could give rise to significant potential for economic development, jobs growth and new homes. The Mayor of London also sees this as an opportunity  to regenerate the wider area.

Based around the new HS2 and Crossrail station at Old Oak, the Mayor, Transport for London (TfL), plus the London Boroughs of Hammersmith & Fulham, Brent and Ealing, have been considering the potential for regenerating the area and are seeking views on a 30-year Vision for Old Oak. This could transform the area with up to 90,000 jobs and up to 19,000 new homes, schools, open spaces, shops and leisure facilities.” LINK

As this last quote shows, the advocates of this plan can't even offer up a coherent concrete argument. It's all maybes and made-up figures and Machiavellian manipulations.

Please, please, please - complete the consultation and show your opposition to the creeping centralisation of power which is placing the wishes of the financiers and developers over the needs of local residents.

South Kilburn anger as Council denies them a voice on being dumped with ventilation shaft

A recurring theme of this blog has been the lack of democracy and poor consultation in matters involvng Brent Council: the views of library users over the transformation project, Willesden Green residents over the redevelopment of the library site, human rights campaigners over Veolia's multi-million public realm contract and more recently the denial of residents' requests to speak at Council meetings on matters that affect them.

Here a South Kilburn tenant outlines the latest case of 'democracy denied'.

Last year Brent Council changed the rules so that residents can no longer address full Council meetings about issues of concern, however much support they have. The claim is that this is unnecessary, since petitioners can address the committee meetings or Executive where the issues are discussed, and there are all sorts of consultations where there views can be heard. 

 

Even when such opportunity exists – committees and consultation forums – this is inadequate, since it is only when an issue comes to full Council that all Councillors are present to hear the issues.

 

But what happens when an issue comes to full Council without going to any committee or consultation beforehand? Isn’t it obvious that in such a situation those affected should be heard? It would be a simple matter of suspending Council standing orders for this to happen

 

Far from it. A report is going to Full Council on Monday (March 3rd) about the affect of the HS2 Bill on Brent. This report notes that the HS2 Bill allows for the acquisition of 2 blocks of (Council) flats and St Mary’s school in South Kilburn, and also calls on HS2 to move the planned ventilation shaft, currently proposed to be next to Queens Park station to a site next to St Mary’s school and those flats.

 

That report has not gone to any committee or the Executive. Affected residents were not informed of its existence by any Councillor or Council Officer, despite their Tenants and Residents Association asking for over 2 years now how they would be affected by HS2 and Brent Council being unable or unwilling to provide them with answers. Residents received recorded letters from HS2 last year saying it might want to acquire their property, and still Brent Council was unable to provide advice on what this might mean. And, of course, residents have not been consulted on their attitude to having the shaft moved next door. This in a situation where residents have made numerous complaints about the effect of living on a building site – being in the middle of regeneration with all the dirt and disruption involved.

 

Yet despite all this, Councillors are denying residents the right to put their views to the Council meeting. There have been attempts to fob them off by saying that their Councillors are able to speak and represent their views. Some of those saying this have no idea whether the Councillors and TRA have the same view on the issues concerned! But the very idea is patronising – who better to put their views forward than residents themselves, especially when so directly affected.

South Kilburn regeneration threatened by HS2

An officers' report going before the Full Council Meeting on March 3rd asks members 'if considered expedient' to resolve to oppose the HS2 Bill  and consider 'the passing of further resolutions..to authorise the deposit of a petition against the Bill in either or both Houses of Parliament'.

The report suggests that location of the proposed ventilation shaft and transformer (see CGI above), next to Queen's Park Station, would have an adverse affect 'not only on that site but also on the Council's regeneration plans for the wider South Kilburn area'.

The report states that there are a number of good reasons to offer broad strategic support for HS2 in terms of improved connectivity and job opportunities in areas such as Old Oak Common, but  identifies three negative impacts on the borough.

1, The Bill seeks powers for the compulsory acquisition of  'all interests' in land in South Kilburn 'which does not appear to be required to implement the proposed new high speed railway line.  The land includes parts of the South Kilburn Estate including St Mary's School, parts of site 11b, Alpha and Gorefield Houses and the new development on Cambridge Road and Chichester Road. It is also proposed that some land will be possessed on a temporary basis and the Council states that it sees no reason why the sites above should be permanently acquired by HS2 and should petition on this basis if discussions with HS2 fail.

2.  The Council has approved plans for the Queens Park Car Park site (Site 18 in the South Kilburn Regeneration Programme)  which involves demolition of Cullen House, Keniston House, Premier House and the Falcon Pub and the erection of 137 flats (39 of which are affordable), public space, office and commercial shop space.  The HS2 plans for a ventilation shaft and transformer would disrupt these plans with a loss to the Council and also affect the decanting of residents on the South Kilburn Estate during regeneration.

The Council has put forward an alternatiuve plan for the ventilation shaft  to go on the east side of Queen's Park Station but HS2 said although that was technically possible  their preferred site was still the original proposals because of  'changes that would otherwise be required to the alignment of the proposed HS2 tunnel, access issues and a likely increase in temporary impacts during construction on nearby residents and a local school'.

A subsequent  report from Lambert Smith Hampton, commissioned by the Council, concluded that there was a 'clear economic and financial benefit associated with relocating the ventilation shaft and auto transformer from Site 18 to the alternative Canterbury Works site. The Council will challenge the adequacy of the project's  Environment Statement on the basis of:

• Inadequate consideration of alternative sites for the proposed ventilation shaft and transform
• No proper justification for the current design and scale of proposals
• Incorrect baseline assumptions
• Inaccurate assessment of effects; and
• Lack of/inadequate mitigations proposed

3. Brent Council  supports the proposals for a new interchange between HS2 and Crossrail at Old Oak Common, including links between the interchange and the West London Line and North London Line. However they also think that additional value could be achieved for a new rail link between Cross Rail an the West Coast Mainline.

The report argues that such a link would enable users of  London Midland Services to transfer onto Crossrail, 'providing improved services straight into central London. It would ease congestion at Euston and  save passenger time. Officers suggest, 'By accommodating the future delivery of this link as part of the HS2 construction plans at Oak Old Common, there would be an opportunity for trains to run to Wembley with a direct link on to Heathrow and services to the West of England.'.

Officers recommend  that the Council considers supporting any petition by TfL for the delivery of enabling works at Old Oak Common to allow for this link.

The report discusses the uncertainties over the amount of compensation the Council might receive from compulsory purchase but goes on to state,  'It is clear that several millions of value are at risk from the HS2 proposals as they currently stand.'

The report sets out the estimated costs of Petitioning the HS2 Bill:

Ventilation Shaft: £150,000
Compulsory Purchase Order £40,000
West Coast Mainline Route £380,000

The report recommends the first two only.

Angie Bray MP supports Brent's concern over Harlesden Incinerator pollution

Angie Bray, Conservative MP for Ealing Central and Acton has spoken out against the proposed 'Harlesden Incinerator' LINK

Following the deferral of the item which was due to be discussed in about an hour at Ealing Planning Committee she publishes the speech she had prepared to deliver:

I have been keeping a concerned eye on some of the pollution issues affecting the different parts of Acton for some time. These include the pollution generated by the Horn Lane site, the problems emanating from the Powerday site and the natural concerns that local residents have around the fact that five sites have been identified for waste disposal around Park Royal.  Clean Power's application comes on top of all of this.

My first concern was immediately created at the meeting I had with Clean Power in Parliament, when they came to brief me on their proposals. I asked whether their application was to run one of the five waste sites whose location had been identified by the Council around Park Royal, as part of the Mayor's London Waste Plan. Imagine my surprise when they clearly had no idea what I was talking about. Later it transpired that they were actually proposing to establish potentially a sixth waste site in this corner of my constituency. Obviously, no one expects that the five sites identified by the Council will all be used, but this addition to those that may be would still add substantially to the problems that would be faced by the community - not least: pollution, odours, transport congestion and noise.

My next concern, following on from what I've just said, is that the residents' community in North Acton, who are living alongside Powerday, would, were this application to succeed, find themselves literally wedged between two major waste disposal sites. I don't think any of us would disagree that Powerday is the source of continual problems for local residents, however much the management say otherwise and indeed work to ameliorate the odours and general pollution. There have been times in particularly hot weather where residents are unable to open their windows - such is the stink caused by the site. And then of course there are rats and do I need I go on...

So is it reasonable to expect residents to have to live with yet another waste disposal site - anaerobic digestive or otherwise - just to the other side of them?

Obviously too there will be the nature of the waste traffic. Residents have had to get used to the traffic generated by Powerday's and the Freightliner site's existing operations, but is the Council really going to expect them now to tolerate even more waste lorry traffic that will inevitably arrive as a result of the operations by Clean Power? How much more heavy traffic is this part of North Acton able to sustain without an intolerable impact on the lives of the local residents?

What has been striking to many of us, which I list as my third concern, is the lack of evidence that Clean Power is able to produce to demonstrate how well their operations work on other sites. Clearly, if we had been able to see happy residents close by to a Clean Power site, then that might have helped to allay fears.  But when I go on their website, all I see is a list of would-be sites, which they hope to develop in the future.  Surely the Council will require better evidence than that?

My fifth and final question is about the choice of the site itself. As I understand it, this site is currently safeguarded for HS2.  Now I recognise that there has been much debate about HS2 - and there may have been some who thought that the cross-party support for the project was breaking down - however, last week in Parliament all parties lined up with very few dissenting members, to support the HS2 project going forward. It strikes me that this site will remain HS2's as the project is unrolled. 

So why is Ealing Council even taking time to consider this proposal when we all know that the safeguarding by HS2 remains firmly in place, as does the project itself? As things stand, there is no site for Clean Power to develop, so can we just recognise reality and put a stop to any further blight of this kind on local residents? I notice Brent is focusing very hard on the pollution aspects of this proposal, and both Brent and Ealing pollution experts are calling for rejection of the plan.  I would like to add my voice to theirs.”

Community mobilises for clean air and no incinerator

Mark Walker of TITRA speaks to the Planning Committee. He is interrupted by the noise of a lorry accessing the proposed site. There will be many lorries  if the proposal is approved.

Local residents came out in force this morning to greet Ealing councillors who were making a site visit to the proposed Harlesden Incinerator development. Representives of TITRA (The Island Triangle Residents Assocation) spoke to the councillors and will be addressing the Planning Committee at Ealing Town Hall on Wednesday August 14th as will Cllr Zaffar Van Kalwala who represents the Stonebridge ward which is close to the site.

There will be a demonstration outside the Ealing Town Hall on Wednesday from 6.15pm.

HS2 or Incinerator - what a choice for Willesden Junction!

Well, here's a dilemma!

The Brent and Kilburn Times is reporting LINK that the Willesden Junction site ear-marked for an incinerator may be required by HS2 to transport waste from nearby tunnelling operations.HS2 under its safeguarding rights would have prior claim to the site.

Brent Greens are opposed to both the incinerator proposal and HS2 - perhaps we should campaign for a much needed green space on the site or an Alternative Technology Centre

HS2 doesn't stack up - Caroline Lucas

HS2 will devastate our community

Follow this LINK to see how HS2 will impact on a long established community.

HS2 - your neighbourhood needs you

The pub, Paradise by Way of Kensal Green is at 19 Kilburn Lane, Kensal Green, W10 4AE (Harrow Road end of Kilburn Lane)

HS2: FOE lays down the line

Responding to reports that Transport Secretary Justine Greening will announce the first phase of work on the High Speed 2 rail link today (Tuesday 10 January 2012), Friends of the Earth Director of Policy and Campaigns Craig Bennett said:
 
"We need to revolutionise travel away from roads and planes - but pumping £32 billion into high speed travel for the wealthy few while ordinary commuters suffer is not the answer.
 
"High Speed rail has a role to play in developing a greener, faster transport system, but current plans won't do enough to cut emissions overall - Ministers should prioritise spending on improving local train and bus services instead.

"Just a fraction of the massive budget for High Speed 2 would rescue the 30,000 solar jobs under threat from Government cuts - investment of this kind would take us a lot further, faster to a safe and prosperous future."

HS2 vanity project a 'disgrace' at time of massive cuts

Last night's meeting sought to re-galvanise the High Speed Rail 2 campaign ahead of the decision on whether to proceed with the project which is expected to be announced by Justine Greening MP on December 20th.

Among the issues that were discussed were:

• The fact that the carbon emissions from the trains will be higher per passenger than car travel.
• The project is a standalone one sponsored initially by Lord Adonis without any links with a strategic transport development plan.
• The lack of connectivity of HS2 (especially with HS1) and the lack of any concrete plans/station locations north of Birmingham.
• The economic case assumes time travelling on trains is 'wasted but we all know people work on trains.
• The costing of £32bn for the whole project does not include the many farm bridges that will be required, works needed as a result of the Environmental Impact Assessment, and the rolling stock.
• In places under Kensal the roof of the tunnel will be less than 10metres below some houses and there is no assessment of the noise and vibration that will be made by 250mph trains as they brake going into Old Oak Common.
• Because Euston will lack platform space we will lose the Overground link with Euston.
• Technology does not exist as yet for running 18 trains per hour in each direction at these speeds.
• The ongoing subsidy for HS2 will benefit the richest in society and no figures have been published for the eventual fare.
• The Transport Select Committee Report on HS2 raises so many issues around context, finance, environmental impact, number of trains per hour that it amounts to requesting that they go back to the drawing board.
• A Westminster Council report, although ostensibly against the project, is aggressively challenging on the route and other issues.

In discussion it was suggested that campaigners should not be duped into concentrating on the detail but instead focus  on what the £32bn could be spent on instead of HS2 at a time when public services are being cut and other railways need investment. A leaf should be taken from the St Paul's Occupiers and the project exposed as a ' @$*&%£#' disgrace'.

The meeting agreed that a bullet point update was requested that could then be used to write to MPs, including' off-route' ones, as well as London Assembly Members.

The Green Party passed this motion on HS2 at its Cardiff Conference:

The Green Party believes that long-distance service provision should not concentrate on high speeds where this will affect local service provision or take up and excessive amount of limited resources.

 Current proposals for a new north-south high speed rail route are based on assumptions about continuing growth in mobility, energy use and CO2 emissions which are not compatible with green party policy.

The Green Party does not support the current (2011) high speed rail proposals known as HS2 but will review this policy if and when evidence emerges that HSR is embedded within an overall policy context that can deliver reductions in the demand for transport, energy use, land take and CO2 emissions.

Further information:
www.stopthetunnel.blogspot.com
www.ktra.co.uk
http://pancamdenhs2alliance.org/

Park Royal Plans Under Scrutiny on New Blog

The boroughs of Brent, Ealing and Hammersmith and Fulham meet at the key location of Park Royal, one of the largest business parks in Europe. The area is a possible location for waste management facilities, including possible incinerators, under the forthcoming West London waste Management Plan. If located here there will be an impact on the amount of heavy lorry traffic going through the three boroughs. Possible waste management facilities can be seen on the map below: (click on image to enlarge)

In addition the area will be affected by High Speed Rail 2 and Crossrail. Hammersmith and Fulham Council is proposing a new station linking the two and other lines as part of the development of the run-down Old Oak area. The council's video designates it 'Park Royal City':


A new  independent website has been set up to monitor developments in the Park Royal-Old Oak Common-Kensal area. It can be found at: http://parkroyaltown.blogspot.com/

Brent's detailed response on HS2 consultation

The Brent Executive will be asked to approve the following officers' response to the government's consultation on HS2 at their meeting on September 19th:

i. Brent Council supports, in principle, the development of high speed rail to help provide the basis for long-term and sustainable economic growth, whilst having the potential to deliver reductions in carbon emissions by achieving a modal shift from air travel. However, investment in high speed rail should not detract from funding for other rail infrastructure.

ii. Brent Council supports the proposals for the Y’ shaped network as one which delivers the greatest benefits for connecting the Midlands and the North to London.

iii. Brent Council welcomes the commitment to link HS2 to HS1. However, it is considered that the current proposal, to use existing track on the North London Line, could adversely impact upon existing suburban services, or upon future proposals to improve these. Any link should have dedicated infrastructure so as not to compromise capacity on the North London Line and/or the frequency or running speed of the HS operation.

The proposal for an interchange station at Old Oak Common is also supported in principle. However, this must maximise the potential for surface and rail connectivity with the surrounding area so that it can become a major transport hub for West London inthe same way that Stratford has developed as a major hub in East London.

There is an opportunity for interchange not only with Crossrail and the Great Western line, but also with the North and West London lines and with the existing West Coast Main Line and London Midland services at Willesden Junction, less than 800 metres away.

The Council believes that maximum benefit would be gained from linking Crossrail at Old Oak Common to the existing West Coast Main Line so that Crossrail trains could then run through onto this track and extend Crossrail northwards through Wembley Central station. This would support Brent’s largest growth area where substantial mixed use development is proposed, and make use of the track capacity anticipated to be generated by HS2.

Such a proposal would not only help maximise connectivity at Old Oak Common but would, more importantly, further relieve pressure from passengers arriving at Euston. The Council are of the view that the scope of HS2 should be widened to develop this proposal hand in hand with HS2.

Additionally the Council is concerned that the proposals do not contain details of arrangements for surface level connectivity to the hub station. The Council are of the view that the hub station should provide increased opportunity for residents in Brent, particularly those in the Harlesden and Kensal Green areas, to access employment opportunities in the region. This should be afforded by direct and suitable surface connectivity to the OOC hub station through Willesden Junction.

v The Council echoes concerns that have been expressed by residents in Brent about the potential effect on residential amenity of a tunnel for high speed trains located directly beneath their homes. Those concerns have not been addressed by information HS2 has provided during the consultation period about the impact
during construction and when HS2 is in operation.

It is Brent Council’s view that it should be possible for a tunnel to be constructed under the current West Coast Main Line track for a substantial part of the route from Old Oak Common to Euston, thus avoiding the possibility of such additional disturbance.

The Council is of the view that HS2 should undertake further work to explore the possibility of re-aligning the route (to the North Acton portal) beneath the WCML.

Additionally HS2 should ensure that construction and operational arrangements for any length of HS2 (or the HS2-HS1 link) in tunnel clearly demonstrate the absence of any impact on properties above the route so as to eliminate current concerns about amenity and blight.

The Council is also concerned about the potential impact of the proposed vent shaft on the Queens Park Station site at Salusbury Road. This is an important site which is a key part of the South Kilburn regeneration proposals, providing a mix of housing (around 200 homes) over lower ground commercial uses. The Council understands that the vent shafts are required approximately every 2 kilometres of tunnel, and that this is the distance between vents implemented on HS1. It is also understood that there is some flexibility over the precise siting of the vent shafts.

The Council is proceeding with the development of the Queens Park station site and therefore asks that the vent be located on an alternative site that is of less value to the South Kilburn redevelopment programme. For example, the vent shaftcould be located on land to the east of Queens Park station which is currently used as a builders yard/depot.

Brent Council also has an interest, as a member of the West London Waste Authority, in the potential impact of the route on the waste management site around Victoria Road in the London Borough of Hillingdon. Brent would wish to see a reconsideration of the route at this point so that it no longer impacts upon the operation of, or future operational proposals at, the Victoria Road waste transfer station.

Finally, and in the wider context, the Council is concerned about the development of HS2 proposals in the absence of plans to manage onward dispersal from Euston.Notwithstanding the positive impact of the OOC hub station on the numbers of passengers needing to use Euston, the Council is concerned that proposals for HS2 are developed and progressed in tandem with a package of measures to ensure that the transport network at, around and beyond, Euston can cope with the additional passenger numbers anticipated as a result of HS2 and regional growth.