The Telegraph has
given a platform to Tory MP Cheryl Gillan, who represents Chesham and Amersham,
to rant
freely about the HS2 project, which she calls a “Labour initiated folly” to “take
a few minutes off the time of a journey to Birmingham”, although “a few” in this case means 35. The rest of
her scattergun analysis is similarly shaky.
May feature trains like this one. Perhaps
She asserts that the cost is “rising steeply”, although construction
work has not yet started, and that the cost/benefit ratio of the project “should shame the Treasury into calling an immediate
halt”, although this
is estimated to be around 2.15 for the “Y
network”, or an outlay of £30 billion bringing benefits of £64.5 billion,
putting the return in the “high”
category.
Moreover, her assertion that HS2 will not connect to HS1 is
wrong, and the obsession with serving “our
main hub airport” is bizarre (there’s no high speed line connecting to the
main airports of Madrid, Barcelona, Rome, Milan, Berlin, Munich, or Brussels, for
instance). And her recommendation of “classless
travel” would trash the economics of Inter-City rail travel in the UK at a
stroke.
But the Tel also
knows that the project has been green lighted, and so also carries a piece informing
readers where HS2 north of Birmingham is going to go. Here, it is told that
Sheffield will “lose out”, although a
station will be located at Meadowhall, which is, er, in Sheffield, with good
local rail connections to Doncaster, Hull, Barnsley and of course Sheffield
city centre.
The problem faced in Sheffield is that it would entail a
serious amount of demolition to get right into the centre (rail buffs
interested in similar projects in the past might like to consider the number
of buildings that had to go when the Great Central Railway drove its new
route through the city of Nottingham at the end of the 1800s, and made room for
what became known as Victoria Station. Over 1,300 of them).
Elsewhere, the Tel
is a little shaky on the route of HS2 to Manchester, asserting that it will go
via Crewe, although my information is that it will pass to the north east of
the town, with a parkway station close to the M6 for Stoke and the Potteries,
and a spur to the Kidsgrove to Crewe line to allow HS2 services to serve
Chester and Liverpool. And I’m not sure about that “Manchester Airport station” idea.
What David Millward’s article misses completely, to no
surprise, is that HS2 will free up capacity on the existing network for
regional passenger services, and most importantly, freight trains, these each taking
dozens of lorry movements off the road network. Moreover, freight traffic is a
profitable business for the railway, which should find favour with politicians
unhappy about rail subsidies.
Including Tories like
Cheryl Gillan, one might have thought.
4 comments:
The DfT's estimates of capital and operating costs for the Y network rose by nearly £8bn between Feb 2011 and Jan 2012. That seems an extraordinary amount for a project of this scale and at this stage of its development. This might be why the PAC think HS2 numbers are unreliable.
See Table 1 P10 of the DfT's summary. http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/hs2-economic-case-appraisal-update/hs2-economic-case-appraisal-update.pdf
Ah, the old canard of lumping capital and operating costs together. And from an anonymous poster too.
If the costs estimates are this far out of whack before a spade has hit the ground, you'd have to be really naive to imagine the margin of error will stay the same, let alone narrow.
The important thing is to read the DfT document and make up your own mind about whether you think the cost/benefit analysis holds water.
Who knows, perhaps the Major Projects Authority may one day publish its assessment, now more than year overdue, which must be giving DfT real nightmares if their own numbers are decaying like this.
Yet another anonymous commenter, and the point I made not answered.
And the abuse is starting, too.
Post a Comment