Recommendation 28

We highlighted the argument for there being a moral expectation that, having cancelled Phase 2, the Government should expedite the opportunity for people to be able to buy back their house or their property. HS2 Ltd acknowledged the point while also not wanting to commit to any timescales given the rules it had to follow and the 50 Qq 161–3 51 Q 166 52 Qq 166, 167 53 Q 168 54 Qq 50, 52 55 Q 122 56 Q 123 HS2 and Euston 17 dependency on steers from Ministers. We also highlighted the argument for maximising return to the taxpayer, which could mean hanging on to property until the market improved. The Department said it was keen to ensure it respected that people had been individually impacted. It emphasised the need to consider both fairness to taxpayers and fairness to affected individuals, on which it would have to put advice to Ministers on the right balance between the two, and then enact the steer received.57 The Department’s Permanent Secretary and Accounting Officer said that, were she to be asked by Ministers to proceed in a way that was not consistent with the tests of Managing Public Money, then she would give that advice and seek a ministerial direction if required.58