Read on Twitter
Yesterday, @JuliaBradbury asked #whyHS2 is happening and if I could say a few things about it...
Hopefully we'll have a chance to have a proper Q&A about it in a couple of weeks… In the meantime, I thought I'd answer a few questions I've seen recently.
https://twitter.com/JuliaBradbury/status/1260984204994772993
Hopefully we'll have a chance to have a proper Q&A about it in a couple of weeks… In the meantime, I thought I'd answer a few questions I've seen recently.
https://twitter.com/JuliaBradbury/status/1260984204994772993
If you've not read it before, my #whyHS2 thread on the environmental need for HS2 is a good primer: https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1206959258832691200
If you want to know about HS2's impact on woodland, this thread by @Greens4HS2 is excellent: https://twitter.com/Greens4HS2/status/1257943946514370560
Similarly, @Greens4HS2 have also done this thread today explaining very neatly why less overall travel still means more rail travel: https://twitter.com/Greens4HS2/status/1261082334994014208
So, on to the first of the questions I'm going to address today…
"Does the country in all honesty need HS2?"
(My answer takes some inspiration from an excellent thread by @njak_100.)
"Does the country in all honesty need HS2?"
(My answer takes some inspiration from an excellent thread by @njak_100.)
The traditional commute has been in decline for several years, yet overall rail use has increased not decreased. Flexible working has lead to more and longer rail journeys, and post-COVID this trend will likely accelerate.
HS2 is a long-term project and won't be fully operational until the late 2030s. Can we honestly believe that we won't need more rail capacity then, given that we are in the midst of a climate emergency?
Post-COVID, there will likely be a reassessment of the fares structure of GB railways, as fares will need to drop to induce passengers back onto the network.
The railways will be a very different place. Franchising is gone for good. https://twitter.com/CityMetric/status/1242042205507903489
The railways will be a very different place. Franchising is gone for good. https://twitter.com/CityMetric/status/1242042205507903489
Fares have been increasing by more than inflation for decades (since long before privatisation), yet fuel duty has been frozen for ten years and post-COVID this is unlikely to remain acceptable.
Incidentally this has now cost the exchequer around £60bn and increased our GHG emissions significantly. https://twitter.com/DrSimEvans/status/1237317628240297985
What is more, rail freight has been a key component in keeping the country running during this crisis, and the only way to create the space for a significantly increased volume of rail freight is by building HS2.
So yes, the country definitely still needs HS2.
So yes, the country definitely still needs HS2.
The next question is about cost…
"Can the country really afford it?"
"Can the country really afford it?"
It is more pressing now that we invest in skills and infrastructure than it ever has been before, seeing as we are entering the deepest recession in our country's history. https://twitter.com/PermanentRail/status/1122921430394593280
National finances aren't like household finances: countries create their own wealth. By investing in new infrastructure, people are employed, trained, progress in their careers, are paid more, and subsequently pay more taxes and spend more money.
This results in increased tax revenue and a ripple effect as the money spent by those employed by the project - 16,000 for Phase 1 alone - then goes on to benefit those people working in other businesses and industries.
And this is before you then consider the economic benefits unleashed by the new line and the released capacity on the existing railway network (this is actually HS2's main benefit), or the unleashing of economic potential that more local, commuter and freight services can create.
Have a read of this piece by the brilliant economist @MazzucatoM, which explains government investment as a tool for wealth creation better than any other: https://democracyjournal.org/magazine/50/yes-government-creates-wealth/
Here's a question that comes up A LOT…
"Why not upgrade what we already have?"
"Why not upgrade what we already have?"
Well, for starters that is already happening. HS2's annual budget is around £2bn and this will rise as works ramp up.
@NetworkRail, the government body that owns and runs our current railway infrastructure, spends around £7bn on the existing railway network each year.
@NetworkRail, the government body that owns and runs our current railway infrastructure, spends around £7bn on the existing railway network each year.
That is before you consider additional enhancement work that is already in the pipeline - electrification (please dear lord let us finally have the rolling programme we've been asking for since the 1910s), new stations, new lines, reopenings… All happening on top of HS2 spend.
But that is a secondary point: Upgrading the existing network is PRECISELY what HS2 does.
By removing non-stop trains that eat up capacity by forcing everything else to get out of the way, HS2 allows a leap in capacity on our existing railway network. https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1164582952170381323
By removing non-stop trains that eat up capacity by forcing everything else to get out of the way, HS2 allows a leap in capacity on our existing railway network. https://twitter.com/GarethDennis/status/1164582952170381323
That means many more local and commuter services, and more freight too.
Ever stood on a platform of an intermediate station along the West Coast or East Coast main lines? Most trains fly through without stopping, preventing more frequent services from operating.
Ever stood on a platform of an intermediate station along the West Coast or East Coast main lines? Most trains fly through without stopping, preventing more frequent services from operating.
It is these trains that HS2 removes onto their own lines, allowing the existing network to run lots more services that are actually useful for people in towns and regional cities. https://twitter.com/PermanentRail/status/1218978778006917123
The last question - or rather, query - I'll address in this thread is also one of the silliest I've heard…
"By the time HS2 is finished the first phase will be so out of date it will need upgrading again."
"By the time HS2 is finished the first phase will be so out of date it will need upgrading again."
This isn't remotely the case. When it opens, HS2 will be the most advanced form of high speed transport on the planet but at its core it is a railway system relying on the robustness of 200-year old engineering principles.
It will also be the highest capacity high speed rail line in Europe, with a capacity of around 20,000 seats per hour in each direction, which is one third greater than all of the current north-south lines out of London combined. https://twitter.com/PermanentRail/status/1095442773979922435
Seeing as HS2 is designed to unlock more local and regional capacity on the existing network and isn't actually about driving increased overall inter-city travel, this should be sufficient to accommodate any future growth.
So no, HS2 won't be out of date before it is finished.
Rail remains the most efficient means of mass transit over land; it is both the past and the future of transport, and anyone who suggests otherwise might not have your best interests at heart.
Rail remains the most efficient means of mass transit over land; it is both the past and the future of transport, and anyone who suggests otherwise might not have your best interests at heart.
