AN OUTSIDE VIEW

The main case for HS2 is that more capacity is needed. The arguments against are mostly being presented by NIMBYs with a very personal interest. Ultimately, whether or not this scheme or any other is value for money must depend on the external value it generates. Land value uplift is probably the best measure of the broader benefits of any infrastructure, although the shortage of data makes it difficult to make reliable forecasts; it came as a surprise when a study commissioned for Transport for London discovered that the Jubilee Line Extension had generated an aggregate increase in land value amounting to three times the construction cost. Nevertheless, enough is known about the influence of railway infrastructure on land value to help decide whether HS2 is a worthwhile project. The high speed line needs to be evaluated on this basis against other possible schemes. The most obvious would be a conventional 125 mph railway on a similar Great Western/Great Central alignment, but another ...

This new railway, known as the East London line extension, has been stitched together by joining up of old routes, many of them long shut, with a few brand new connecting pieces. The project, initiated by Transport for London, has cost about £1 billion and is expected to generate ten times that value in economic regeneration. Its effects have already been noted in areas like Croydon, where it has given a boost to land values. The operation involved the transfer of some routes from the national network to London Transport, which runs it under the title "London Overground". The route is badged with the standard London Transport roundel with an orange circle. The top picture shows Canonbury, now a busy four-track station which since the end of World War two was almost derelict, with buddlea bushes growing on the platforms. The lower picture shows a train approaching Haggerston, with city skyscrapers in the background. The station had been closed since the start of World War 2.

The £32 billion high speed rail network scheme should be scrapped according to 21 high profile businessmen, senior Tories and economists in a letter to The Daily Telegraph today . Signatories to the letter, dismissing the project as an “expensive white elephant”, include Lord Wolfson, the chief executive of Next and Tory competitiveness adviser as well as Nigel Lawson, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer. They have dismissed the scheme as a “vanity project” which will cost every family in Britain at least £1,000. Unfortunately, whilst this opposition is not coming from NIMBYs, the argument against is argued with little more coherence than the case for, which can be summed up in the words of the Secretary of State for Transport: Countries across Europe and Asia are already pressing ahead with ambitious plans for high speed rail. Britain cannot afford to be left behind.

Jim Steer, leading proponent of the high speed rail project and founder of Greengauge21 has written this a rticle in the Guardian, the second on the subject within just a few days. The comments are more interesting than the article itself. There are a few in support, from hardened HS2 advocates, but the majority are opposed. Most make the obvious and reasonable point that the rest of the system needs to get the investment and that high speed rail is of little value unless it is well connected to the rest of the system. There is little benefit in high speed rail if passengers then find themselves in a taxi stuck in a traffic jam, where the time saved is quickly squandered. It seems that there is growing appreciation of this simple and obvious point. How quickly it will take Britain's lords and masters to grasp this is another question, especially given the weight of vested interests that is now gathering behind the HS2 bandwagon.

As Secretary of State for Transport Philip Hammond declares his commitment to the high speed line, support is shrivelling. Article in the Daily Telegraph

Train interior , originally uploaded by seadipper . Why is the HS2 proposal for the standard European gauge? If built to an enhanced loading gauge, it ould accommodate 3.5 metre wide passenger trains such as Bombardier's Gröna Tåget. This is a development of the Regina (above) and provides comfortable 2+3 seating - 25% more capacity than a conventional width train. And then there are double-stack high-cube containers to be fitted in. All of which would add relatively little extra to the cost, and would in any case be much less expensive if built as a conventional speed railway.

Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Transport, said this yesterday in Parliament " Over the last few months we have worked together on these issues and I can now announce that I am resuming the IEP procurement and proceeding with the proposal that Agility Trains have put forward as preferred bidder. "We will now work with Agility Trains with a view to reaching financial close by the end of this year. This is, of course, subject to the Government continuing to be satisfied that the proposal offers value for money as the commercial negotiations are concluded and that the final arrangements are compliant with the United Kingdom’s EU obligations. "This deal will allow us to provide better, faster, more comfortable services and to continue providing through-journeys between London and parts of the rail network which are not electrified. "In total, there will be over 11,000 more peak time seats each day on the Great Western Main Line and East Coast Main Line post IEP, ...

Questionnaire Do you agree that a national high speed rail network from London to Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester (the Y network) would provide the best value for money solution (best balance of costs and benefits) for enhancing rail capacity and performance? No. I have read the document on alternative investment strategies. (High Speed 2 Strategic Alternatives Study by W S Atkins). On the basis of that report, it is simply not true to say that the benefits that they would deliver would be disruptive and poor value for money. In any case there other other alternative strategies which appear not been explored at all, in particular, the construction of a conventional (125 or 140mph speed railway on roughly the same alignment as HS2). The Rail Interventions section of that report concentrates on upgrades to the West Coast Main Line and the Chilterns route to Birmingham and in case of the latter, an interesting list of interventions are postulated. Amongst the options discussed is the ...

Questionnaire Do you agree that there is a strong case for enhancing the capacity and performance of Britain’s inter-city rail network to support economic growth over the coming decades? Yes. But there is not a competition between rail in Britain and rail in other countries. The idea that Britain will in some sense be "left behind" suggests the idea of some kind of sporting event. It is possible to travel from London to Cologne all the way by high speed train, and I have done so several times. This route is not in competition with London to Newcastle, a comparable distance which I also use regularly. I have stopped using both in recent years because I find the alternatives cheaper, more comfortable and more convenient. Neither route provides an affordable walk-on service or even an affordable walk-on service off-peak. Common to both routes are cramped and uncomfortable trains, shortage of luggage space, and complicated fares are complicated tied to travel on a particular tr...