The Higgins HS2 report: masterly inactivity

You don’t get to be the £597,000-a-year chairman of a big government-owned company like HS2 Limited without knowing how to handle demanding politicians and a dimwitted public. And so it is with Sir David Higgins. His report ‘HS2 Plus’ published on Monday, was hotly anticipated in the media, who said he was going to propose ways of lowering the cost of the £43 billion High Speed 2 rail project, just as both Labour and Conservative politicians demanded.

In the end, Sir David proposed doing almost nothing new about the project, and very little in the way of cost cutting. The project’s budget will stay the same. Yet he received praise from many commentators who seemed to think he was calling for major changes. That is no bad thing if the project is essentially sound, but then his report is little more than brilliant – and rather sneaky – PR.

This has happened before. I blogged last month about how the Department for Transport had briefed the media about a supposed £10 billion cost saving, when that ‘saving’ was already part of the HS2 plan.

Part of the Higgins report restated existing arguments about HS2: for example, that passenger traffic is going up and that the project will help fix the north-south divide by making the centre and north of the UK more economically competitive with the south-east. So far, so familiar.

The report attracted attention by calling for a new station, called a ‘regional transport hub’, at Crewe and doing this by 2027, six years before the northern sections of HS2 are scheduled to be finished. Trouble is, this was already anticipated by the HS2 Phase Two environmental statement published last July, which says:

HS2 Ltd also developed an option which converted Crewe into a high speed station. This could bring significant benefits to passengers wanting to use Crewe station whilst still providing a connection to the existing railway to allow services still able to run on to Liverpool and the North West.”

So the station is not new – only the 2027 date is, and even under this new timetable HS2 won’t reach Manchester or Leeds by then. That same environmental statement talked of how HS2 trains could run on from a link line at Crewe to the existing rail network and other parts of the country, like North and South Wales, which have complained up till now (somewhat unfairly) that HS2 doesn’t serve them.

Similarly, going for a full rebuild of Euston station was initially considered among the options for HS2 Phase One – and then discounted on cost grounds. Plus, as I blogged on Monday, the idea of getting property developers to contribute towards the cost of the new Euston station is not new to either HS2 or Crossrail, where it’s already been done.

Finally, Sir David talks in his report of HS2 being a network, not a line, of it having to be integrated with the existing rail network and transport links. All well and good. And already part of the plan: that is why infrastructure minister Lord Deighton has been packed off to provincial cities with his ‘HS2 growth taskforce’, encouraging them to get ready for HS2.  To say nothing of Network Rail’s 2013 ‘Better Connections’ report, which was all about getting the most out of HS2 for other rail destinations.

I don’t really blame Sir David for doing this – it’s his job to deliver HS2 and that means educating politicians and the public about its benefits, which are real. This seems to mean repackaging existing ideas which weren’t properly communicated before.


About René Lavanchy

You can contact me at rene dot lavanchy at googlemail dot com.
This entry was posted in Rail infrastructure and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The Higgins HS2 report: masterly inactivity

  1. Oli says:

    Isn’t the scrapping of the HS1-HS2 link a very big deal? That effectively sinks all hope of direct services to the continent from north of London… which were promised well over 20 years ago, and part of the package which got parliament to approve HS1 and the Channel Tunnel in the first place.

    I thought Higgins’ comparison of the transfer from Euston to St Pancras as being similar to changing terminals at Heathrow was pretty disingenuous. Firstly, changing terminals is quite a big deal which people avoid wherever possible (and which tends not to happen if your connection is with the same airline alliance anyway), and secondly the point of the link wasn’t so people could have connections at St Pancras – it was so they could have direct onward services without changing trains, let alone stations.

    If we’re serious about curbing short-haul flights, which on this kind of timescale we will have to be if we’re not to totally trash the climate, then this is precisely the kind of infrastructure we need.

    This doesn’t do anything to dispel the idea that HS2 is basically for the benefit of London – the one bit of infrastructure in the HS2 project which would a) have inconvenienced London and b) been of direct benefit specifically to those not travelling to or from London is the bit that has just been axed.

    • René Lavanchy says:

      I agree that the Heathrow comparison doesn’t really stack up. But we’ve been promised a review of options for connectivity. Hopefully that will result in a better link rather than no link at all. I don’t think we should settle for anything less than a seamless rail link that means direct services without getting off the train. The case for HS2 serving the continent is much better than that for linking the continent to conventional train services from the existing network via HS1, as you allude to, because of the time saving and the hopefully better quality service HS2 trains will provide. The 1990s plans to have cross-country international services via HS1 were a non-starter and not well thought out.

  2. Oli says:

    Also: £597k! WTF! Astonishing. No wonder it’s so expensive.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s