DOCSLIB.ORG

Fast Track Scotland Making the Case for High Speed Rail Connections with Scotland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fast Track Scotland Making the Case for High Speed Rail Connections with Scotland Fast Track Scotland Making the Case for High Speed Rail Connections with Scotland Fast Track Scotland Making the Case for High Speed Rail Connections with Scotland Ministerial Foreword The argument for a high speed rail network in the UK is strong, but is stronger when Scotland is included. That is the clear message from this report, published by Scotland’s Partnership Group for high speed rail. Scotland stands together in its support for high speed rail. The Partnership Group brings together colleagues representing the broadest spectrum of Scotland’s interests. It speaks for communities and business across Scotland’s diverse geographical and economic landscape. We see the benefit of high speed rail to Scotland. It will stimulate our industry sectors and improve Scotland’s attractiveness to inward investment. And, we are convinced of the benefit of Scotland’s inclusion to the rest of the UK. Better connections with Scotland’s strong economic sectors will benefit cities across the UK. High speed rail will substantially reduce the need for domestic aviation between Glasgow, Edinburgh and London; the potential for environmental benefits is huge. I established the Scottish Partnership Group to develop and promote Scotland’s case for inclusion in a UK-wide, strategic high speed rail network. It has done so in a spirit of close co-operation and with a clarity of purpose, and it has set challenges for both the UK and Scottish Governments. I thank all of those involved. I endorse this report, and I am pleased to present it on behalf of the group. Keith Brown MSP Minister for Housing and Transport iii Executive Summary y Scotland stands united in support of high speed rail. It is vital that a high speed rail network be established across the UK to secure its future competitiveness and economic prosperity. y The investment case for high speed rail is strong, but is stronger when Scotland is included. y Scotland supports a high speed rail strategy which brings Edinburgh and Glasgow closer to London and the UK’s great cities, and which preserves and enhances aviation links with London’s airports for the north of Scotland. y A new high speed line must be built to Scotland to realise the fullest economic and environmental benefits for the UK. This report sets out Scotland’s case for high speed rail. It has been prepared by the Scottish Partnership Group for High Speed Rail, formed by Keith Brown MSP, Scotland’s Minister for Housing and Transport, in June 2011. The group has been established to develop and promote Scotland’s case for inclusion in a UK-wide, strategic high speed rail network, and comprises partners from across Scotland’s Business, Civic and Transport Communities. It speaks with one voice in its support for Scotland’s inclusion in a full British high speed rail network. The Scottish Partnership Group brings together the following organisations: y CBI Scotland y City of Edinburgh Council y Glasgow City Council y Glasgow Edinburgh Collaboration Initiative y Nestrans y Network Rail y Scottish Chambers of Commerce y Scottish Council for Development and Industry y Scottish Enterprise y Scottish Futures Trust y Scottish Trades Union Congress y SESTran y Strathclyde Partnership for Transport y Transform Scotland y Transport Scotland The group’s principal conclusion is that the investment case for high speed rail is strong, but is stronger when Scotland is included. This report demonstrates the clear benefits which Scotland’s inclusion in a full UK high speed rail network could bring for the whole of Scotland. It also demonstrates the benefits to the rest of the UK when Glasgow and Edinburgh are directly connected to the network, and that Scotland’s inclusion improves the overall business case for high speed rail in the UK. v A high speed rail link to Scotland provides significant economic and environmental benefits to Scotland and the rest of the UK. It will: y Increase rail capacity to comfortably accommodate future demand y Significantly educer journey times between Scotland and the UK’s major cities y Encourage modal shift from air and road to rail y Support and benefit businesses throughout Scotland and, in particular, enable Glasgow and Edinburgh to remain competitive in attracting inward investment. However, it is not only the scale of the benefits but the timing of when they are delivered that is important. It is essential that Scotland is included in the construction programme north of Birmingham. Therefore, it is the position of the Scottish Partnership Group that planning for high speed rail in the UK does not go far enough; planning must continue beyond Manchester and Leeds. The remit of HS2 Ltd1 must be extended to include detailed planning for high speed rail to Scotland. This report recognises that demand for long-distance rail travel continues to grow, and that without additional capacity the UK rail network will be severely constrained. With appropriate integration with the existing network, high speed rail will deliver better rail connections for all of the country. A high speed line to Scotland is required. Only a new line will deliver the benefits that Scotland needs, and deliver journeys fast enough to ensure that rail replaces aviation’s dominance of the Scotland-London travel market. Although there are carbon impacts in the construction of any new line, the inclusion of Scotland in the UK’s high speed rail network is essential for realising significant reductions in UK carbon emissions and is vitally important in achieving major levels of modal shift from air to high speed rail. Only rail journeys significantly below 3 hours will achieve this objective. It is unclear that the proposed operation of ‘hybrid’ or ‘classic-compatible’ trains running to Scotland on existing lines will deliver journey time improvements for Anglo-Scottish services. Similarly, it is vital that a new line releases additional rail capacity for both freight and regional passenger services. Routes to Scotland are significantly constrained; running ‘hybrid’ trains will not improve that position. Inclusion in a UK high speed rail network will allow Scotland greater economic equity with other areas of the UK. If Scotland is not included Glasgow and Edinburgh will be comparatively further away, in terms of journey times, from London than their main competitors who are served by high speed lines. It is imperative that high speed rail is developed in the UK. It is also imperative that Scotland is included if the UK is to see the full benefits of its contribution to the economy. 1 High Speed Two Limited (HS2 Ltd) is the company set up by the Government to consider the case for a new high speed rail network in the UK. It is charged with developing recommended routes between London and the West Midlands, and onwards to Manchester and Leeds. vi Table of Contents Ministerial Foreword ii Executive Summary iv 1 High Speed Rail 01 1.1 High speed rail is needed in the UK 01 1.2 The benefits of a UK high speed ailr network which includes Scotland 02 1.3 Learning from others 05 1.4 The status of the network planned for the UK 05 1.5 The implications for Scotland’s connectivity 10 1.5.1 HS2 Ltd proposals for Scotland’s connectivity in 2026 11 1.5.2 HS2 Ltd proposals for Scotland’s connectivity in 2033 11 2 Strategic and Economic Context 13 2.1 EU Policy Context 13 2.2 UK Policy Context 13 2.3 Scotland’s Strategic Vision 14 2.3.1 National Planning Framework 2 15 2.4 Economic Context 16 2.4.1 Wider Edinburgh economy 18 2.4.2 Wider Glasgow economy 20 2.4.3 Wider Scotland 21 3 The vision for high speed rail in Scotland 23 3.1 Channel Tunnel Rail Link 23 3.2 Integration with the Scottish Rail Network 25 4 Assessment of Benefits 27 4.1 Economic 27 4.1.1 Economic welfare benefits 27 4.1.2 Wider economic benefits 30 4.1.3 Inward investment 34 4.1.4 Key growth sectors 36 4.1.5 Benefit to the UK economy 44 4.1.6 Passenger demand and revenue 46 viii 4.2 Benefits to Passengers and Rail Operators 49 4.2.1 All of Scotland will benefit 49 4.2.2 Capacity 54 4.2.3 How would additional capacity benefit Scotland? 54 4.2.4 Punctuality and reliability 57 4.3 Environment 57 4.3.1 Overall emissions associated with cross-border travel 59 4.3.2 Embodied carbon 63 5 Assessment of Costs and Challenges 65 5.1 Capital Costs 65 5.2 Operating Costs 66 5.3 Challenges to Analysis 67 5.4 Risks 67 6 Value for Money 69 7 References 73 List of Figures Figure 1 High Speed Rail network at 2032 07 Figure 2 Rail/Air Market Share 59 List of Tables Table 1 Indicative future journey times 10 Table 2 Overview of the Scottish economy by region 17 Table 3 Responses from businesses in Scotland to a survey of opinions on high speed rail 31 Table 4 Incremental increase in demand in 2055 of extending from Manchester to Scotland 48 Table 5 Change in Rail Market Share across key European Routes 62 Table 6 Embodied Carbon Emissions for Current Proposed Route and the Extension to Scotland 63 Table 7 Quantified ostsC and Benefits (£ millions) of Manchester to Scotland (2002 PV/prices) and resulting BCR over 60 year appraisal period 69 Table 8 Sensitivity Analysis – Quantified Costs and Benefits (£ millions) of Manchester to Scotland (2002 PV/Prices) And Resulting BCR over 60 year appraisal period 70 ix 1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • High Speed Rail
    House of Commons Transport Committee High Speed Rail Tenth Report of Session 2010–12 Volume III Additional written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be published 24 May, 7, 14, 21 and 28 June, 12 July, 6, 7 and 13 September and 11 October 2011 Published on 8 November 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited The Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Transport and its Associate Public Bodies. Current membership Mrs Louise Ellman (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) (Chair) Steve Baker (Conservative, Wycombe) Jim Dobbin (Labour/Co-operative, Heywood and Middleton) Mr Tom Harris (Labour, Glasgow South) Julie Hilling (Labour, Bolton West) Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne) Mr John Leech (Liberal Democrat, Manchester Withington) Paul Maynard (Conservative, Blackpool North and Cleveleys) Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South) Graham Stringer (Labour, Blackley and Broughton) Julian Sturdy (Conservative, York Outer) The following were also members of the committee during the Parliament. Angie Bray (Conservative, Ealing Central and Acton) Lilian Greenwood (Labour, Nottingham South) Kelvin Hopkins (Labour, Luton North) Gavin Shuker (Labour/Co-operative, Luton South) Angela Smith (Labour, Penistone and Stocksbridge) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • HS2 London to the West Midlands Appraisal of Sustainability
    HS2 London to the West Midlands Appraisal of Sustainability Main Report Volume 1 A Report for HS2 Ltd February 2011 HS2 London to the West Midlands: Appraisal of Sustainability Main Report Volume 1 HS2 London to the West Midlands Appraisal of Sustainability Main Report Volume 1 A Report for HS2 Ltd 55 Victoria Street London SW1H 0EU T 0207 944 4908 [email protected] Principal author Nick Giesler Key contributors Andrew Bryant, Andrew Mayes, Amanda Pownall, Sheenagh Mann, Sam Turner, Tony Selwyn, Yaser Ali Technical contributors Carbon and climate Matt Ireland, Tony Selwyn, Andrew Bryant, Water Environment Landscape & townscape Gillespies, Nick Giesler Cultural heritage Cotswold Archaeology Biodiversity Ecology Consultancy Ltd, Nick Giesler Water and flood risk Water Environment, Andrew Bryant Air quality John Rowland, Enan Keogh Noise and vibration John Fisk, Sasha Villa, Mark Southwood, Rob Adnitt Community integrity and accessibility Vicky Ward, Sheenagh Mann Equality Vicky Ward, Future Inclusion Health and well-being Institute for Occupational Medicine, Sheenagh Mann Socio-economics Derval Cummings, Stuart McCully, Colin Buchanan (consultants) Resources and consumption Andrew Mayes, Tony Selwyn, Sam Turner, Andrew Bryant Reviewers Mark Southwood, Stuart McCully, Roger Cooper This report was commissioned by, and prepared for HS2 Ltd and the Department for Transport (DfT) by Booz & Co. (UK) Ltd (www.booz.com) and Temple Group Ltd (www.templegroup.co.uk) ('The Consultant'). The findings and conclusions set forth in this report represent the best professional judgment of the Consultant based on information made available to it. The Consultant has relied on, and not independently verified, data provided to it by such sources and on secondary sources of information cited in the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Optimised Alternative
    Further written evidence from 51M (HSR 109B) This supplementary evidence is submitted to update the Committee on issues related to the “Optimised Alternative”, as described in Chapter 1 of our main submission, and to respond to the supplementary evidence submitted to the Committee by DfT and HS2 Ltd this week. Given the time constraints we have provided a detailed response on the Optimised Alternative and overview responses on a number of the issues raised in the DfT and HS2 Ltd supplementary evidence. We may provide a more detailed response to the Committee on certain items of the supplementary evidence in the near future. Optimised Alternative Neither DfT nor HS2 Ltd has made any attempt to engage with us directly on our proposed approach or the Optimised Alternative. DfT acknowledge that they have not carried out a full analysis of 51m’s alternative, despite its higher capacity and its lower capital costs than Atkins’ Rail Package 2. This is somewhat surprising since it has now been in the public domain for some 3 months. Below we respond to the statements made by DfT and HS2 Ltd in their supplementary evidence and the “Yes to High Speed Rail” campaign paper from William Barter, which purports to analyse the Optimised Alternative. • Both the DfT’s supplementary evidence and the William Barter paper assert that much of the 215% additional capacity set out in the Optimised Alternative doesn’t count, as any calculation of capacity increases should be based on the capacity after completion of the existing project to lengthen some of the current 52 Pendolino trains from 9 to 11 cars.
    [Show full text]
  • Railnews High Speed 2 (Special Report)
    July 2008 SPECIAL REPORT What future for High Speed in Britain? BRITAIN’S rail system is running out of modernisation of the West Coast Main Line will capacity. Demand will exceed the network’s have created extra capacity on the route— capability within 20 years—possibly within 10 including the four-tracking now under way in years—according to all the latest forecasts. And Staffordshire—but Parliament’s Public Accounts these do not take into account higher demand if Committee has warned that the modernised route motoring costs continue to remain rise. could be at full capacity again from as early as Contrary to many earlier reports, neither the 2015. government’s 2007 White Paper on the next 30 The government agrees that in future it would years of the rail system nor Sir Rod Eddington’s be better to build new lines rather than upgrade report in December 2006 on Britain’s transport existing ones. infrastructure ruled out the development of a new “The clear view of railway professionals with north-south high-speed rail line. experience of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link and Although the government dropped West Coast Main Line projects is that the consideration of a MAGLEV (magnetic disadvantages of undertaking major new levitation) route—on the grounds that it could construction work alongside a working railway cost around £60 billion—the 2007 White Paper outweigh the advantages. … For this reason the made clear there was a need to start planning Government believes that any future planning ahead of the next ‘high level output should focus on new line options,” said the specification’ (HLOS) in 2012 for the possibility railway White Paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Selling HS2 Delivering a Return on Government’S Investment
    www.psrc.pwc.com Selling HS2 Delivering a return on Government’s investment July 2011 Contents Introduction & Summary 1 Sale of HS1 – the background 2 What is the potential sale value of HS2? 3 Approach Results Sensitivities Five key actions to achieve value for money 7 Conclusion 9 About Greengauge 21 10 About PwC 10 Contacts 11 Introduction & Summary HS2 is the proposed 175km line from London to the West Midlands. The anticipated construction cost is £13.9bn3. When operations commence in 2026 it will allow speeds in excess of 200 mph and a journey time from London to Birmingham of 49 minutes4. The Secretary of State for Transport, Philip Hammond The route would generate many benefits recently confirmed that it is the to communities in terms of job creation UK Government’s intention to sell and connectivity gains. The analysis here High Speed 2 (HS2) once built1. suggests that proceeds from the sale of the line could also be significant – up to 50% We have prepared this paper for of the anticipated construction cost. Greengauge 21 to provide a high level The sale proceeds will not fund the full illustration of the potential proceeds costs of designing and building HS2, which from a sale of HS2 and other financial reinforces our earlier work in Fast Forward benefits and to outline some key actions – Funding Report5 which asserted that the to achieve best value from a sale. Our “delivery of high speed rail could not be analysis is based on projections of funded solely from its own revenue and revenue and cost provided to us by HS2 therefore substantial government Limited2 and Greengauge 21.
    [Show full text]
  • High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’S Future Consultation Summary Report
    dialoguebydesign making consultation work High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’s Future Consultation Summary Report November 2011 A report to HS2 Ltd and the Department for Transport Prepared by Dialogue by Design dialoguebydesign making consultation work High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’s Future Consultation Summary Report November 2011 A report to HS2 Ltd and the Department for Transport Prepared by Dialogue by Design Email: [email protected] Website: www.dialoguebydesign.net The information or guidance in this document (including third party information, products and services), is provided by the Department for Transport on an 'as is' basis, without any representation or endorsement made and without warranty of any kind whether express or implied. The Department for Transport has actively considered the needs of blind and partially sighted people in accessing this document. The text will be made available in full on the Department’s website. The text may be freely downloaded and translated by individuals or organisations for conversion into other accessible formats. If you have other needs in this regard please contact the Department. Department for Transport Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR Telephone 0300 330 3000 Website www.dft.gov.uk General email enquiries [email protected] Queen’s Printer and Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 2011, except where otherwise stated Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • High Speed Two (HS2) the Debate
    High Speed Two (HS2): the debate RESEARCH PAPER 11/75 17 November 2011 HS2 is a £32 billion project to build a high speed rail line from London to Manchester and Leeds, via Birmingham to begin operation in 2026 and be completed in 2032. It was supported by the Labour Government after 2009 and has had the support of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Government since May 2010. This paper marshals the arguments from all sides to give a broad overview of the debate about the proposed HS2 scheme. Supporters claim that the line is urgently needed to meet projected future demand; to tackle the capacity constraints on the West Coast Main Line; and to deliver wider economic and regional benefits. Opponents maintain that these claims are over-stated and that future demand and capacity can be met via other, cheaper means. If the government decides to go ahead with the first phase of the scheme from London to Birmingham, we can expect legislation to be introduced within the next couple of years. Based on experience of previous rail projects of this scale, it could take between two and four years for the HS2 bill to complete its legislative progress. Only once the legislation has been passed could building work commence. Louise Butcher Matthew Keep Alan Rehfisch Andrew Minnis Recent Research Papers 11/60 Unemployment by Constituency, August 2011 17.08.11 11/61 London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (Amendment) 22.08.11 Bill: Committee Stage Report 11/62 Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill: 24.08.11 Committee Stage Report
    [Show full text]
  • Chris Day Paper
    POLITICS, REASON AND THE ART OF HIGH SPEED RAIL Chris Day City of Edinburgh Council INTRODUCTION During 2011 the Government will consult on its proposals for a High Speed Rail network between London and the north, including Scotland. Potentially the major transport and engineering project for a generation, ‘HS2’ is likely to be constantly in the news throughout 2011. This paper reviews the history of HS2, the implications and issues for Scotland, and gives an up-to-date overview of where the project stands at the time that STAR 2011 takes place. The paper is sourced on the author’s experience of promoting High Speed Rail for Scotland. The history of HS2 is analysed as a partly political, partly technical process. The implications and issues for Scotland include a brief description of the case for Scotland and an analysis of the risks and opportunities to Scotland arising from Westminster’s proposals and the Scottish Government’s response. The overview of the project reflects the start of Westminster’s consultation. The consequences of the Scottish election one week before the STAR conference may be considered in the conference presentation. A short description and history of High Speed Rail ‘High Speed Railways’ operate at more than 150mph, and usually over 185mph, on new or substantially improved infrastructure with rolling stock purpose-built for prolonged high speed running. Operating speeds have gradually increased; the benchmark is now at least 185mph, and possibly 220mph, on lines under construction. Japan’s Shinkansen (first operating from Tokyo to Osaka in 1964) is generally considered to be the first High Speed Railway.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond HS2 Barnsley
    Chord Diagram Most (direct) connections start at the top and rotate clockwise, as a default routine of the Chord creation application. Swansea and South Holland do not appear as they have no directs services. 1 or more direct services / hour 1 direct train every 2 hours Fewer than 1 direct train every 2 hours North East Lincolnshire North Kesteven East Lindsey North East Lincolnshire West Lindsey North Lincolnshire Harrogate Boston North Lincolnshire Craven Derbyshire Dales Sheffield Bassetlaw Rotherham Manchester Lincoln Calderdale Bradford Leeds Selby Beyond HS2 Barnsley Barnsley Kingston upon Hull Nottingham / Derby East Riding of Yorkshire Bolsover London North East Derbyshire Kiklees Liverpool Cheshire West & Chester Birmingham South Kesteven May 2018 Edinburgh Cheshire East Newcastle Doncaster Glasgow Bristol Wakefield Cardiff York Chesterfield Warrington Sheffield Leeds © May 2018, Greengauge 21, Some Rights Reserved: We actively encourage people to use our work, and simply request that the use of any of our material is credited to Greengauge 21 in the following way: Greengauge 21, Title, Date ii Beyond HS2 | Greengauge 21 Contents Preface Foreword 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 National and regional policies 11 3.0 Market trends and passenger requirements 29 4.0 Freight 51 5.0 Framing a national strategy 69 6.0 HS2 services and corridors 89 7.0 Scotland, the North of England and the Midlands 97 8.0 The South of England, Wales and London 131 9.0 Re-connecting places left behind 163 10.0 Conclusions 177 Annex 1: Direct rail connectivity between economic sub-regions across Britain and London and other major British cities 195 Annex 2: National plan components 205 About us 209 Beyond HS2May 2018 Chord Diagram Most (direct) connections start at the top and rotate clockwise, as a default routine of the Chord creation application.
    [Show full text]
  • High Speed 2: the Best We Can Do? Creating More Value from £33 Billion Nef Is an Independent Think-And-Do Tank That Inspires and Demonstrates Real Economic Well-Being
    High Speed 2: The best we can do? Creating more value from £33 billion nef is an independent think-and-do tank that inspires and demonstrates real economic well-being. We aim to improve quality of life by promoting innovative solutions that challenge mainstream thinking on economic, environmental and social issues. We work in partnership and put people and the planet first. nef (the new economics foundation) is a registered charity founded in 1986 by the leaders of The Other Economic Summit (TOES), which forced issues such as international debt onto the agenda of the G8 summit meetings. It has taken a lead in helping establish new coalitions and organisations such as the Jubilee 2000 debt campaign; the Ethical Trading Initiative; the UK Social Investment Forum; and new ways to measure social and economic well-being. Contents Executive summary 2 3. Investments in mass transit and buses 15 Introduction 4 4. Investments in active transport 18 What do we mean by real alternatives? 4 5. Investments in future connectivity 21 What is HS2 trying to achieve? 5 Conclusion 24 How far does HS2 meet its own objectives? 5 Appendix I 25 What alternatives has the Government looked Appendix II 27 at so far? 5 Endnotes 29 nef’s alternative investment package 7 1. Investments in mainline rail 9 2. Investments in regional rail and station redevelopment 12 Executive summary The Government is about to commit £33 billion to a single high speed rail project – the largest transport investment in UK history. But is this the best use of taxpayers’ money? Other transport investments could outstrip High Speed 2 on value for money and perform better against the scheme’s objectives, but as yet they are unexplored.
    [Show full text]
  • High Speed 2: One Track Mind? Considering the Alternatives to HS2 Nef Is an Independent Think-And-Do Tank That Inspires and Demonstrates Real Economic Well-Being
    High Speed 2: One track mind? Considering the alternatives to HS2 nef is an independent think-and-do tank that inspires and demonstrates real economic well-being. We aim to improve quality of life by promoting innovative solutions that challenge mainstream thinking on economic, environmental and social issues. We work in partnership and put people and the planet first. nef programme areas: Climate Change Connected Democracy and Finance and and Energy Economies Participation Business Natural Social Policy Valuing What Well-being Economies Matters nef (the new economics foundation) is a registered charity founded in 1986 by the leaders of The Other Economic Summit (TOES), which forced issues such as international debt onto the agenda of the G8 summit meetings. It has taken a lead in helping establish new coalitions and organisations such as the Jubilee 2000 debt campaign; the Ethical Trading Initiative; the UK Social Investment Forum; and new ways to measure social and economic well-being. Photo: orangeacid via Flickr Contents Introduction 2 How should HS2 be evaluated against alternative investments? 3 How well does HS2 perform against its other objectives?” 5 The methods matter 7 Public confidence: what is the return on investment? 10 Conclusions 11 Endnotes 12 Introduction One year on from the Government’s decision to proceed with the HS2 project, the question remains whether the £33 billion scheme is the best investment for achieving the Government’s strategic objectives. At a time of serious economic difficulty the role of infrastructure investment is clear and the time is ripe for heroic approaches, but not by being cavalier with society’s scarce resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Failure to Transform: High-Speed Rail and the Regeneration Myth
    IEA Current Controversies Paper No. 48 FAILURE TO TRANSFORM: HIGH-SPEED RAIL AND THE REGENERATION MYTH By Richard Wellings April 2014 IEA Current Controversies Papers are designed to promote discussion on economic issues and the role of markets in solving economic and social problems. As with all IEA publications, the views expressed are those of the author and not those of the Institute (which has no corporate view), its managing trustees, Academic Advisory Council or senior staff. Acknowledgements This publication has been made possible by the support of the Nigel Vinson Charitable Trust. The directors and trustees of the IEA thank the Rt. Hon. Lord Vinson of Roddam Dene, LVO, for both The author would also like to thank Professor David Starkie, who conceived the idea of examining the impact of high-speed domestic services on East Kent, for his highly valuable feedback and suggestions. The usual disclaimer applies: the author bears all responsibility for errors and omissions. Contents About the author 4 Summary 6 Rebalancing the economy: the government’s case for High Speed 2 8 Transport, employment and growth 12 High Speed 1 and East Kent 22 Conclusion 34 References 37 4 About the author 55 Dr Richard Wellings is Deputy Editorial Director at the Institute of Economic Affairs and Director of IEA Transport. He was educated at Oxford and the London School of Economics, completing a PhD on transport policy at the latter in 2004. Richard is the author, co- author or editor of several papers, books and reports, including Towards Better Transport (Policy Exchange, 2008), High Speed 2: The Next Government Project Disaster? (IEA, 2011), Which Road Ahead – Government or Market? (IEA, 2012) and The High- Speed Gravy Train: Special Interests, Transport Policy and Government Spending (IEA, 2013).
    [Show full text]