A rail network for everyone | New Economics Foundation


This report looks in considerable detail at the economic and strategic case that underlies the planned construction of new high-speed rail lines between London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds (HS2). It also looks at how the benefits of investing in the nation’s rail network could be shared more widely across the UK. However, in the debate about HS2, there is only one set of questions that is commonly asked: Should HS2 proceed, be postponed, be cancelled, or at least be re-routed?

The New Economics Foundation’s answer is linked to the evidence. Though HS2 is alluring as a project and enjoys cross-party support, the strategic case that underpins it is unconvincing and leaves the scheme looking like an expensive answer in search of a question.

It is impossible to ignore the reality: Contracts for phase 1 are soon to be let and the government may have already spent more than £4 billion on the project. Furthermore, judging HS2’s efficacy is made more difficult in the absence of a wider rail, transport, or economic strategy, and against a backdrop of poor management and coordination across the network. There is also a lack of available detailed data about passenger movements because it is collected by private enterprises and therefore ​commercially confidential’.

It is also important that the starting point of any debate about HS2 be the right one. Too often reports arguing against HS2 have started from the principle that it is too expensive and that it would be better to invest in cheaper infrastructure or not invest at all. This is the wrong point of departure as our railways suffer from massive under-investment in every UK nation and region. Putting that right will cost very significant sums of government capital. But in a time when the government needs to rediscover its fiscal role and invest more in productive assets, such as transport, that should not be a major barrier.

The problem with HS2, however, is that it is the product of decades of government retrenchment from the fiscal realm and strategic planning, and of a fragmented rail network, with multiple private sector and public stakeholders. It is also the product of an economy in crisis, an economy desperately trying to unhook itself from London-centricity and all its malcontents, but actually compounding the problem by starting the project in London.

Following a shambolic 18 months on the railways, with disastrous timetable changes, the wrong kind of weather, and the cancellation of planned electrification schemes, the government has launched a ​root and branch’ review. However, the review is missing some key roots and branches, two of them being HS2 and the latest package of maintenance and upgrades agreed with Network Rail. These have been deemed out of scope but should be included.

There are two fundamental problems with the railways in the UK that, in the interests of ensuring immediate and long-term value for public money, need addressing before the much-needed major investment is committed. The first is the absence of an overarching rail or transport strategy, which leaves HS2 looking like the solution to a problem that has not yet been defined. It is what many in the rail industry call an engineering-led project rather than something that enjoys strong strategic or economic justification. The second fundamental problem is the chaotic ownership and management structures that will almost certainly lead to the squandering of investment capital.

 

Source: A rail network for everyone | New Economics Foundation

One thought on “A rail network for everyone | New Economics Foundation

  1. Every project has to undergo the finance problem, yes, it is well over budget, but what project has gone through on budget, for are they all prone to cost well in excess of the original budget.

    Surely before any project is thought of, let alone costed the reason why there is always a massive overspend should be solved.

    Is it just that the people involved are no good when it comes down to financial planning and responsibility?

    If the finance was the only consideration then no projects would be proceeded with.

    A round London and the South there have been many projects over the last 30 years M25 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M25_motorway, Channel Tunnel and high-speed Eurostar passenger trains, the Eurotunnel Shuttle for road vehicles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel, Crossrail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossrail, and many others. But what about the North, is it really just the M62 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M62_motorway, there was talk of HS3 https://www.itv.com/news/topic/hs3/, but who knows what is occurring.

    It would appear that London and the South get their project, but as usual the North appears not to.

    For England does exist after the ‘Watford Gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watford_Gap, let alone of the other areas of the UK.

    There needs to be euqality in processing projects and their completion, yes money is a major factor but so is equality.

    HS2 will go some way to address this inequality and HS3 much more.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.