HS2 will not offer value for money and risks “short changing” the North of England,says the House of Lords Economic Committee in a report released today.
Peers found that the Government has made little progress in answering the questions raised in its 2015 inquiry.
In the 2015 Economics of High Speed 2 report they stated that there was a strong case for improving regional rail links in the north, but the Government had failed to consider whether such a scheme was a better investment than HS2.
The Committee recommends that the northern section of HS2—the second phase of the project—should be combined with Northern Powerhouse Rail and treated as one programme, allowing for investment to be prioritised where it is most needed.
They also recommend that the funding for the Northern Powerhouse Rail Programme should be ringfenced and brought forward where possible.
Sir Terry Morgan, former Chairman of HS2 and Crossrail, told the Committee that “nobody knows” what the final cost will be. Peers are concerned that if the costs of the London-Birmingham section overrun, the northern sections may not be built.
HS2 is being designed to operate initially at 360 kilometres per hour, faster than any other train in the world. The new report re-emphasises the 2015 recommendation that the Government should assess properly the cost saving that could be made by lowering the speed.
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, Chairman of the Economic Affairs Committee, said:
“Commuter services in the north of England are badly overcrowded and reliant on ageing trains. Rail connections between northern cities are poor. As the Committee suggested in its 2015 report, rail infrastructure in the north should be the Government’s priority for investment, rather than improving north-south links which are already good. The north is being short-changed by the Government’s present plans, especially as construction on HS2 is starting in the south. Any overcrowding relief from HS2 will mainly benefit London commuters.”
“The plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail should be integrated with the plans for the northern section of HS2, and funding for the project ringfenced. This will allow rail investment in the north to be prioritised where it is most needed.”
“The costs of HS2 do not appear to be under control. It is surprising therefore that the Government has not carried out a proper assessment of proposals to reduce the cost of HS2—such as lowering the speed of the railway or terminating in west London rather than Euston—which the Committee recommended in 2015. A new appraisal of the project is required.”
“If costs overrun on the first phase of the project, there could be insufficient funding for the rest of the new railway. The northern sections of High Speed 2 must not be sacrificed to make up for overspending on the railway’s southern sections.
