What now for HS2

[Fyldeboy]

Firstly, let me make it clear that I'm essentially in favour of HS2.

However, the new PM, if they stick to Tory ethics is going to want to cut taxes, whilst the rest of the country want them to up state support due to the multiple crisis we are in. Money needs to be found.

To me HS2 seems a low-hanging-fruit area to save money - not necessarily for the long-term benefit.

Much of the route is in construction - so better to abandon or continue?

Distances are relatively short - better to stay high-speed or downgrade?

Benefits in opening up to freight flows?

Essentially, if a PM chooses to make a quick hit, where is the sword likely to fall?

 

[CW2]

I would say that the low-hanging fruit of the HS2 project has already been collected, i.e. reducing the number of platforms at Euston, abandoning Toton, scuppering the Eastern leg, and ditching the Golborne link. Any further cuts would have a serious impact upon those companies currently busily engaged on building the route, many of whom are serious donors to the Tory party. I think you can draw your own conclusions...

 

[MarkyT]

Some in the ERG caucus with its US libertarian Tufton St links would cancel it without a second thought, no matter what the cost or consequences. That is because they're climate change denying lobbyists fully bought and paid for by big oil and the airline industry, who want to avoid the line becoming a success at all costs and threatening their income streams. Cue the likes of Richard Wellings suggesting more and more cuts to scope, even in one recent article suggesting the current construction in progress should be converted into a road for buses.

 

[Hadders]

Too late to change what's being built now. It'd cost much more to change it now.

 

[Snow1964]

There is also the problem of what happens to the approx 150 mile long building site if you cancel.

It would cost a lot to restore the landscape. Actually might cost more than finishing the earthworks with existing planned landscaping (even if don’t lay the track or install any railway)

 

[MattRat]

The WCML is full, no amount of political gymnastics will change that. The part to relieve it has to be built. Everything else isn't as mandatory though, yet.

 

[Irascible]

Deferral is a much easier way of selling cuts, with an opening left to U-turn later.

 

[philosopher]

Too late to change what's being built now. It'd cost much more to change it now.

Completion of Stage 1 and 2a I would have thought is very likely to be built. Stage 1 has progressed to far to cancel and stage 2a is relatively cheap.

 

[deltic]

Phases 1 and 2a will be built but if they need to save money now, may slow down construction - phase 2b will continue through Parliament to support red wall and there is no political benefit in stopping it at this stage as no money needs to be committed to it this parliament.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Interesting Jeremy Hunt said he would make (Tatton MP & HS2 sceptic) Esther McVey his deputy on the BBC Sunday Politics this morning, not that I think he will win (a partnership that reminds me of John Macain and Sarah Palin in the US a few years ago).

With phase 1 under construction and the Handsacre link descoped phase 2a to Crewe will have to be built, (scrapping now would mean £billions in compensation to construction companies who have agreed contracts).

Phase 2B to Manchester could be vulnerable but without that there is no Northern Powerhouse Rail and would mean abandoning any semblance of attempting to level up which would hand huge amount of ammunition to Labour ahead of the next GE.

 

[Gareth]

I don't think there's any Northern Powerhouse Rail anyway. The comically unserious name gives it away really. That said, what's left of the Leeds leg will go before the Manchester part does.

 

[The Planner]

Interesting Jeremy Hunt said he would make (Tatton MP & HS2 sceptic) Esther McVey his deputy on the BBC Sunday Politics this morning, not that I think he will win (a partnership that reminds me of John Macain and Sarah Palin in the US a few years ago).

With phase 1 under construction and the Handsacre link descoped phase 2a to Crewe will have to be built, (scrapping now would mean £billions in compensation to construction companies who have agreed contracts).

Phase 2B to Manchester could be vulnerable but without that there is no Northern Powerhouse Rail and would mean abandoning any semblance of attempting to level up which would hand huge amount of ammunition to Labour ahead of the next GE.

Handsacre descoped? Its still being built.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Handsacre descoped? Its still being built.

I thought it had be changed to simplify the design so couldn't handle the full end of phase 1 service to the north as originally intended as most of the trains to north were going to join the WCML at the end of phase 2a south of Crewe instead?

 

[snowball]

I thought it had be changed to simplify the design so couldn't handle the full end of phase 1 service to the north as originally intended as most of the trains to north were going to join the WCML at the end of phase 2a south of Crewe instead?

I think the detail of the GSJ with the WCML at the end of the Handsacre link has been changed? But it's still a GSJ. Hopefully someone will be more specific.

 

[matacaster]

The WCML is full, no amount of political gymnastics will change that. The part to relieve it has to be built. Everything else isn't as mandatory though, yet.

Whilst the Southern WCML is indeed full, are all those commuter services needed now and in the future? Could some get the chop to provide more paths for freight?

 

[snowball]

I think the detail of the GSJ with the WCML at the end of the Handsacre link has been changed? But it's still a GSJ. Hopefully someone will be more specific.

Found an old discussion. The Handsacre link will connect with the WCML slow lines which at this point are on the outside. See maps on page 19 of this:

https://committees.parliament.uk/download/file/?url=%2Fpublications%2F358%2Fdocuments%2F1402&slug=opening-statementpdf

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whilst the Southern WCML is indeed full, are all those commuter services needed now and in the future? Could some get the chop to provide more paths for freight?

The peak service will be thinned a bit in Dec, but this is more bringing capacity usage to a reliable level than that you would want to cram freights in.

 

[The Planner]

I thought it had be changed to simplify the design so couldn't handle the full end of phase 1 service to the north as originally intended as most of the trains to north were going to join the WCML at the end of phase 2a south of Crewe instead?

Nope. As already noted, it joins the slows instead of the original design of landing in the middle and needing a realignment of the up lines.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Nope. As already noted, it joins the slows instead of the original design of landing in the middle and needing a realignment of the up lines.

That I what I understood so could the slows handle the full phase 1 service without 2a being built?

 

[MattRat]

Whilst the Southern WCML is indeed full, are all those commuter services needed now and in the future? Could some get the chop to provide more paths for freight?

Not if you care about the environment. We need more people on trains, not less.

 

[Hadders]

Whilst the Southern WCML is indeed full, are all those commuter services needed now and in the future? Could some get the chop to provide more paths for freight?

HS2 is built with 50 years worth of growth in mind, not just for the next few years.

 

[BrianW]

The matter of the moment will be what the various candidates for PM say in order to pull in the necessary votes. Tax cutting seems to be #1. Where are the Tory HS2 votes located? As was observed above most likely is a period of delay described as review and general stringing-out of 'commitments' and expenditures. Red wall seats might get some 'promises' come out in about 18-24 months time.

If RMT bring on strikes government will take opportunity to 'beat unions' (it worked for Thatcher- the 'hero'), and promise more roads, and fewer potholes. Few rail fans in government. More reliable, ie fewer, trains.

 

[The Ham]

The matter of the moment will be what the various candidates for PM say in order to pull in the necessary votes. Tax cutting seems to be #1. Where are the Tory HS2 votes located? As was observed above most likely is a period of delay described as review and general stringing-out of 'commitments' and expenditures. Red wall seats might get some 'promises' come out in about 18-24 months time.

If RMT bring on strikes government will take opportunity to 'beat unions' (it worked for Thatcher- the 'hero'), and promise more roads, and fewer potholes. Few rail fans in government. More reliable, ie fewer, trains.

Fuel duty cuts and air passenger duty cuts aren't necessarily as easy wins as they once were.

It should also be noted that in recent weeks (excluding the few days either side of the bank holiday and the strikes) rail use has been between 85% and 93% of pre pandemic levels.

Given that London to West Midlands/North West/Scotland was about 170% of 2009 levels in 2019, then even at 85% that's still going to be 144% of 2009 levels.

That's not far off the predictions of 150% of 2009 traffic levels at the opening of phase 1. To be within 5% given a major pandemic isn't bad going.

However there's still a bit of time to see further growth/to see more reliable (i.e. regional/TOC specific) data which could show that things are better/worse than this.

Although it's not surprising that those opposed to rail investment will quote out of date data to push their agenda; for example Grant Shapps:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commo...ribution-21C4FF28-452C-4F64-AD6C-1C47FE82D010

(My bold)

The railway is in a fight . It is in a fight for its life, not just competing with other forms of public and private transport but competing with Teams, Zoom and other forms of remote working. Today, many commuters who three years ago had no alternative but to travel by train have other options, including the option of not travelling at all. Rail has lost a fifth of its passengers and a fifth of its revenue.

That statement was made on the 20th June, rail passenger numbers were reliably above 80% by 10th May with the data lag being about 3 weeks. As such by there was at least 2 whole weeks of data showing that passenger numbers were over 80% when they statement was made.

Now at the time it could have been a statical blip. However it's likely that the candidates are likely to make reference to that speach to justify cuts to rail/HS2, even though the more recent data confirms that it was not a blip and rail use appears to be (other than around the strikes) appears to be doing reasonably well (the Monday after the strikes was 83% and Mondays tend to be lower than the rest of the week - yes I know that 3% above 80% could be seen as a rounding error, however that's also very much in the two weeks where the data isn't fully set and often the data values go up a little).

 

[deltic]

Shapps said patronage and revenue are down by a fifth which your figures also show so not sure what the point being made is here. Taking inflation into account revenue is actually down more in real terms the loss of full fare long distance trips being the problem.

 

[The Ham]

Shapps said patronage and revenue are down by a fifth which your figures also show so not sure what the point being made is here. Taking inflation into account revenue is actually down more in real terms the loss of full fare long distance trips being the problem.

About a month before his statement passenger numbers had reached above 80%, the current data for the day of his statement shows it as 90% (so a fall of 1/10th).

The point I'm making is that the numbers have (other than for the strike days) improvements beyond that. However, if you saw/heard the interviews of those critical of the RMT at the time they were often using figures of 30% falls, which were from even further back (around February).

The point being, is whilst Shapps was broadly right at the time (if possibly a few weeks behind) his statement is likely to be cited as the current state of play during any leadership campaign as justification for cutting HS2, even though it's likely that rail use isn't far off from where it was predicted to be.

 

[The Planner]

That I what I understood so could the slows handle the full phase 1 service without 2a being built?

Neither the fasts or slows matter, it will be Colwich that will cause the issues. Though the gap between 1 and 2A opening won't be huge.

 

[Purple Orange]

Cutting HS2 doesn’t help the Tories or the next PM at all. They’re all campaigning on a ticket of cutting tax, which could be small and nobody so far has stated they will change any of the core Transport policies. That campaign promise to cut tax could be the reduction in National Insurance. fuel duty or business rates. This would have an impact on the here & now, in the tun up to election, whereas cutting HS2 doesn’t do anything for reducing anyone’s personal tax burden.

Another angle is that it only serves to give Labour ammunition for campaigning for 2024. It results in nothing gained and something lost electorally for the Tory party, which with only 2 years (or less) to the next GE, will be all they care about.

 

[stuu]

Hs2 is being paid for with borrowed money, raised against the future revenues. It is not being paid for from general taxation, so the idea the money can be used to fund tax cuts is nonsense. Of course economic literacy has not exactly been order of the day for some time, but it would make no sense to cancel now, unless the business case has changed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Hs2 is being paid for with borrowed money, raised against the future revenues. It is not being paid for from general taxation, so the idea the money can be used to fund tax cuts is nonsense. Of course economic literacy has not exactly been order of the day for some time, but it would make no sense to cancel now, unless the business case has changed.

Well, it has - COVID has changed it. Massively.

It might however have changed it positively in that the idea of moving away from London but going in once a week for meetings using HS2 is now a far more feasible one for many employees, vs. the old order of living in the South East and going in every day but Friday.

Where it's potentially changed it negatively is that the south WCML no longer really needs a significantly increased commuter service (indeed it's going to see small cuts to it in Dec, replaced with a more regularised service based on 2/4tph per station more like the early 2000s post PUG1 service), so it probably needs to be reassessed based on how it can take cars off the M1/M6 vs. the "relieving the south WCML" benefit, though being able to add freight in spare paths is still relevant.

 

[Mikey C]

If HS2 hadn't been started, then yes it would be vulnerable, but with the current Tory government heavily reliant on Northern Red Wall seats, it would be awful politics to cancel the sections (Manchester, East Midlands) not authorised yet, especially as the spending will be in the future anyway