I’ve been catching up with the Government’s bold plans for High Speed Rail connections out of London to the Midlands and the North, announced on 11 March. 

The Government considers that over the next 20-30 years the UK will require a step change in transport capacity between its largest and most productive conurbations, and that a new railway is the answer, a stance in marked contrast to the Eddington Report of 2006 whose conclusions were accepted by the Government at that time.  According to all accounts, the new pro-rail approach (to which I am not unsympathetic) reflects the personal conviction of the Secretary of State, Andrew Adonis. The question is whether the new policy is robust.  Would it survive in a climate of financial stringency and the shrinking of the state, as may be the context over the next decade?

The case for HS2, as the new line is called, is based on rail industry projections of demand growth doubling by 2030.  ‘This growth is being driven in the main by people’s increasing propensity to travel further and more frequently as they grow wealthier.’  There is no assumption about when saturation of rail demand might occur, even though overall travel demand has already saturated (as I argue).

Although the Government’s case for the huge public investment needed to construct HS2 emphasises its contribution to economic growth, arguably the projections don’t substantiate this justification. It is estimated that 57% of HS2 passengers would otherwise have travelled by classic rail, 27% would be new trips, 8%  would arise from modal shift from air, and 8% modal shift from car.  The diversion of road traffic is extremely modest, with traffic flows on the southern section of M1 expected to fall by only 2%.   70% of HS2 passengers would be travelling for reasons other than business, leisure being particularly important. 

The 355 miles of High Speed Rail would cost about £30 billion.  The main benefit identified is time saving, about 30 min between London and Birmingham for instance.  Is this good value compared with other calls on public resources such as the transport infrastructure to support the 10m growth of the UK population projected by 2030, or the decarbonisation of electricity supply to power future surface transport? I am doubtful.