Labour must continue to back High Speed Two.
The case for High Speed Two is as strong now as when Labour committed itself to the project in March 2010. The key justification is not speed but capacity. There will be an acute shortage of transport capacity from the 2020s to convey freight, commuters and other passengers into and between the major conurbations. Since there is no plan – let alone political will – to build new motorways between these places, or to dramatically increase air traffic between them, this additional capacity must largely be met by rail or Britain will grind to a halt. Rail is in any case the most efficient and green mode of transport for mass passenger and freight movements.
To do this there is a simple choice: upgrade existing (mostly Victorian) lines and stations or build entirely new lines and stations. Upgrading existing lines is hugely expensive, and yields far less additional capacity than building new lines: the major upgrade of the West Coast Main Line from London to Birmingham and Manchester was completed at a cost of £10bn, after a decade of disruption, and yielded only a fraction of the capacity improvements of HS2.
HS2 trebles existing rail capacity between the conurbations it serves, to the benefit not only of intercity services but also local and freight services because of the capacity freed up on the existing lines. Detailed costings that I commissioned in 2010 suggested that to secure just two-thirds of this extra capacity by upgrading existing lines would cost more in cash terms than building HS2.
Debates about faster journey times to Birmingham, and whether or not business travellers work productively on trains, are beside the point. If the additional capacity is required, it ought to be provided in the most cost-effective manner.
However, the additional benefits of HS2 are considerable. As it proceeds further north, the time savings become steadily greater: nearly an hour off every journey between London and Manchester, Sheffield and Leeds. The connectivity benefits are also dramatic. HS2 transforms links between the Midlands and the north, as well as between London and those conurbations. HS2 includes a direct interchange with Crossrail – the new east-west underground line through London, opening in 2019 which will convey passengers to the economic heart of London in a fraction of the time, and with far less congestion than presently.
Where Labour should be critical is in the coalition’s mismanagement of HS2. After three years, there is still no legislation for even the first phase of HS2 from London to Birmingham. Meanwhile, the projected costs have risen sharply – the latest announcement was of £42.5bn for HS2 through to Manchester and Leeds – in large part because of a massive increase in provision for unplanned contingencies (which accounts for £14bn of the £42.5bn). If the project were well managed there would be no need for such a large contingency reserve; advice to the government suggests that including such large contingencies simply bids up the cost of projects.
In 2015 Labour will need to get a grip on HS2 to accelerate progress and reduce costs. But it should not forsake an infrastructure project vital to our economic and social future.
—————————————————————————–
Andrew Adonis is chair of Progress and is a former secretary of state for transport
—————————————————————————–
Boys always have to be careful of being seduced by big shiny toys.
It was right for New Labour to complete HS1 and start Crossrail – making up for lost time several decades after France had created the TGV network and built the RER for the Paris region. But if the best return for the UK is on investment in new capacity and speed between the Midlands and Leeds why not build that first, before all economic activity drains to London? I am happy with the East Coast mainline which puts York two hours from London. And I see no benefit in going from Leeds to London via Birmingham.