Martin Tett, the leader of Buckinghamshire County Council has written to Prime Minister Boris Johnson following the announcement that an independent review into HS2 will be undertaken.

Last Wednesday, it was announced that a review into ‘whether and how HS2 should proceed’ will be carried out and sent to transport secretary Grant Shapps by the autumn.

Cllr Tett started the letter by discussing the business case, saying that it was ‘fundamentally flawed’.

Mr Tett said: “BCC (Buckinghamshire County Council) is not opposed to high speed rail or any other infrastructure projects in principle, we are however vehemently opposed to HSW because the business case is fundamentally flawed and represents poor value for the UK taxpayer.

“We understand that costs are rising, certainly in the billions and if costed at today’s prices. Poor procurement practices by HS2 Ltd are regularly reported in the media with contractors choosing to take legal action.”

The leader of the council also expressed concerns about both the environmental and social impacts of HS2.

Speaking about the environmental impacts, Cllr Tett said: “The council foresaw the damage and destruction that would be wrought upon the county. Now that the enabling works have started our worst fears have been realised.

“The works so far have shocked local residents and elected members. There has been environmental destruction by some 80 schemes, across over 500 acres. Hedgerows, ancient trees and woodland have been pre-emptively removed.

“From a Government and a Party that committed to ‘leave the environment in a better condition than it found it’, my members find these actions totally unacceptable.”

In regard to the social impacts, the leader added: “We are seeing the loss of amenities, with the recent announcement of the closure of Aylesbury Park Golf Club in Aylesbury and the shattering of smaller community such as at Potter Row and Chetwode.

“We hear from residents who are having their businesses and properties compulsorily purchased who have not received payment or which are being undervalued.

“Although permanent land is being kept to a minimum, larger temporary land take could be required for up to 10 years, which could still devastate communities.”