An interesting idea
.. what could have been done with £100bn?
An interesting idea was suggested to me by The Times on the day that the latest report on the HS2 debacle came out. What, the man from The Times asked, what could have been done with £100bn as opposed to spending it on HS2?
That touched a nerve. As a long term opponent of HS2, I argued that there was much else that should get priority in terms of both the railway but also transport as a whole.
I remember being told by supporters of HS2 that there was no opportunity cost – it would just be a billion or so a year that would not even come out of the existing transport budget. They were wrong. HS2 is costing £7bn per year and definitely the Treasury’s reluctance to give the go ahead to other projects is the result of that huge bottomless pit.
In my hastily compiled wish list of what to do with £100bn, I would put electrification of the network at the heart of railway improvement. I would also support the idea of a freight line from north to the Channel Tunnel, as was put forward in the 1990s but never acted on. Add in reviving suburban rail networks in various towns and cities across the UK, creating the 20 tram schemes that John Prescott committed set out in his Transport 2010 document and a whole host of improvements to make the travel experience better – whether it is toilets at stations, more platform staff, easier ticketing, guaranteed wifi and much more.
Incidentally, I can no longer remain an opponent of HS2. It is far too late to scrap it. I have long argued that the government could not simply leave the assortment of major structures dotting the heart of England to rot and present future generations with a conundrum about their purpose, perhaps musing that it was homage to some mysterious god. Now according to the Financial Times, a study examining whether the whole HS2 project should be ditched found that it would have cost as much to end the project as to continue with it. That’s because the land would need to be reinstated given that the legislation under which it was purchased was specifically to build a railway. Therefore tunnels would have to be filled in, viaducts taken down, and embankments flattened. I am not sure whether all that would be legally necessary but court cases would go on for years and meanwhile all that money will have been spent for nothing. At least we will get a railway out of it, even if it is not until the 2039, the latest date suggested in the ‘reset’.
The reason for such a further lengthy delay is difficult to explain unless one looks at the malign role of the Treasury. The cheapest way to complete the scheme would be to ensure work was carried out as quickly as possible but the Treasury, which does not trust the railways (understandably perhaps) would not allow that. By stretching out the construction process costs more money and delays any revenue coming in, but in the short term it looks cheaper.
The most depressing aspect of all this is the success of high speed rail in so many other countries. My new book, Fast Track, due to be published at the end of July highlights these achievements which, to be fair, have often come at a price. As I document, high speed projects across the world have not been immune to controversy, protests, overspends and errors, but for the most part they have been hugely popular once completed. The key behind the success stories has been cross party consensus, a coherent strategy, good delivery mechanisms and a clear sense of what is needed. Sadly we have lacked all those. Sadly, the United Kingdom and the United States are exceptions, both burdened with uncompleted and very expensive schemes, with dates that ever seem more distant.
Christian Wolmar’s new book, Fast Track, will be published on July 23rd. Email him at christian.wolmar@gmail.com for a discounted signed copy.
My Substack premium subscribers will get a chance to be invited to my next book launch event in London. I’d love to meet you there! More info soon.Thanks
