Government announces independent review into HS2 programme

[Glenn1969]

That's definitely something we can agree on. I hope they go through with NPR, some form of Transpennine Upgrade and the Hope Valley scheme because all 3 routes require upgrading

 

[daodao]

I beg to differ for the Stockport corridor, and also the Winsford-Weaver Jn section of WCML.

The Crewe-Alderley line currently only has 4 passenger tph and about 1 goods tph. Cheadle Hulme to Stockport has 8 passenger tph, but minimal freight. From south of Stockport to Piccadilly, there are 4 tracks.

The Winsford-Weaver Junction section is relatively short, and there are currently only 5 passenger tph along it (3 to Liverpool, 2 to Warrington and beyond); it should be possible to hold freight trains in loops (or going north in the Crewe-Winsford section) to avoid delaying passenger trains.

Neither line requires a bypass.

No increase in capacity in the north?! In Greater Manchester, 4 car formations (rather than 2 car) are now the norm, not the exception, with electrification and DNU cascades.

I rarely see more than 2 coach trains on the Mid Cheshire line, and the electric stopping trains serving Wilmslow and Macclesfield have 3 coaches.

 

[Robertj21a]

Well, they need to change their perception. It is a ridiculous idea to pander to moaners by not building the bit of the line that is most needed first.

Quite. Hence why the promoters of HS2 should just be honest and admit that the primary need is to free up capacity south of Milton Keynes. It's never going to help the North if it doesn't get past the first phase, so it's a bit of a con to keep saying that it's to help the North.

 

[Ianno87]

The Crewe-Alderley line currently only has 4 passenger tph and about 1 goods tph. Cheadle Hulme to Stockport has 8 passenger tph, but minimal freight. From south of Stockport to Piccadilly, there are 4 tracks.

4 tracks, but a myriad of flat junctions and conflicting moves (the Edgeleys, Heaton Norris for freight, Slade Lane). The section is full to capacity.

The Winsford-Weaver Junction section is relatively short, and there are currently only 5 passenger tph along it (3 to Liverpool, 2 to Warrington and beyond); it should be possible to hold freight trains in loops (or going north in the Crewe-Winsford section) to avoid delaying passenger trains.

No. Holding freights in loops increases the level of capacity needed, due to the time needed to stop and re-start on the main line, which includes their runs all the way through to beyond Warrington. And once you shut a freight in a loop for say half an hour, the meaningful capacity of the loop is pretty much lost for the rest of the hour.

And freight journey times are important too.

Neither line requires a bypass.


.

Yes they do - that's why HS2 is planned to go to Manchester Piccadilly and just south of Wigan.

 

[matacaster]

To rebalance spending so it is more equitable to the north (in fairness, other parts of the country do need some action too)

-Build a new commuter tube line (much above ground, 100mph max, with decent stock) to cover
Milton Keynes and other stations south to London. Some trains would stop at Milton Keynes to allow transfers onto tube line for stations to the south. That would free up some capacity for freight and long distance travel. A simple tube line not encountering the myriad of things in central London should be relatively cheap.

-MML should be electrified through to Leeds immediately, with a new fast section of track between Sheffield and Leeds- This could be achieved with less disruption if the unused and moribund old MML route was redeveloped as the fast line
-TPE via Huddersfield should be electrified throughout

Should HS2 go ahead however,

-Birmingham and Manchester should have only one through station
-There should only be Phase 2a to Manchester and hence via HS3 (initially via Huddersfield by cutting back some of the 6 stoppers an hour to say 4 or maybe 5) to Leeds
-Max speed should be no more than 186mph, its a small country, the main beneficiaries of very high speed would be Scotland (who don't want to leave EU and would expect us to pay for a railway we don't need as much as they do) or a seamless journey to the continent but that's messed up by terminating at Euston.

 

[Camden]

Until the issues are resolved on all counts, nothing should be going ahead at all.

This whole debacle shows there is an overwhelming need for real world passenger use and revenues to be made public, and for all forecasting to be completely open to public scrutiny.

When data is kept secret, accountability goes out of the window. Then the problems come.

HS2 needs to be scrapped because it is designed on top of a political unwavering and over specific remit, and that remit was wrong in the first place.

The scrapping of this can be used to make the process of developing infrastructure fairer, and more appropriate for a democracy. Those learnings, clearing out of personalities, breaking up of teams and departments, shutting down of networks of influence and introduction of safeguards may one day be able to be used to deliver a high speed line which the country can be proud of and which is worth having.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

So far no one has been able to explain how if HS2 is abandoned how will the growth in passenger numbers on the Southern WCML be accommodated? The line is full and there is no room for extra services to be run.

What are the number of passenger journeys anticipated on the opening of phase 1 in 2026 compared to the number of passenger journies today? Aren't we close to hiting the 2026 figures now?

If the government does decide not proceed with HS2 after an anticipated general election this autumn I can see the decision coming back to haunt them in time for the next election in 2024 as the growth in passenger number leads to overcrowding and the problem becomes more acute.

 

[Chester1]

Quite. Hence why the promoters of HS2 should just be honest and admit that the primary need is to free up capacity south of Milton Keynes. It's never going to help the North if it doesn't get past the first phase, so it's a bit of a con to keep saying that it's to help the North.

Delaying phase 1 by a year and merging it with phase 2a would help to address this. Crewe is barely in the North (assuming that Cheshire/Staffordshire border marks the North West - West Midlands border) but there would be a clear improvement from day 1 e.g. Manchester/Liverpool to London/Birmingham. Phase 1 has probably been delayed too much to meet the 2026 target and if the review recommends alterations they could be added to the phase 2a bill as one merged phase.

 

[Camden]

So far no one has been able to explain how if HS2 is abandoned how will the growth in passenger numbers on the Southern WCML be accommodated? The line is full and there is no room for extra services to be run.

Assuming this to be true (and right now nothing can be taken for granted on that front):

1) the value of having robust, for-the-people, with consent, evidence based decision making far outstrips that of any railway line, and

2) the government will just have to try properly to stimulate the economies outside of London, to remap demand to where capacity can be provided and so reduce the need for commuting (both to London and outside it, where more people can work in the places they already live).

It wasn't that long ago that government policy deliberately prevented economic growth in Birmingham to prevent it from rivaling London. While that was stupid, a policy that delivers economic growth in Birmingham, Northampton, Leicester, Liverpool, and so on, would be far from it.

That's a long way from current policy, which at best seeks to artificially create two equally abstractive London mini-me economies out of two arbitrary locations, and at worst seeks to establish government outposts to rule over a country that has fewer and fewer reasons to keep paying taxes.

 

[Gems]

Same old, same old. Come up with a idea based on a flawed ideology. Allow tendering, accept the lowest bid, Wait for the increased cost demands by contractors due to a belief the taxpayer will bail them out, and we end up here.

There should be heads on poles over the shocking waste of taxpayers money with this, but it will all be written off as usual.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Assuming this to be true (and right now nothing can be taken for granted on that front):

1) the value of having robust, for-the-people, with consent, evidence based decision making far outstrips that of any railway line, and

I don't understand a word of that sentence

2) the government will just have to try properly to stimulate the economies outside of London, to remap demand to where capacity can be provided and so reduce the need for commuting (both to London and outside it, where more people can work in the places they already live).

It wasn't that long ago that government policy deliberately prevented economic growth in Birmingham to prevent it from rivaling London. While that was stupid, a policy that delivers economic growth in Birmingham, Northampton, Leicester, Liverpool, and so on, would be far from it.

That's a long way from current policy, which at best seeks to artificially create two equally abstractive London mini-me economies out of two arbitrary locations, and at worst seeks to establish government outposts to rule over a country that has fewer and fewer reasons to keep paying taxes.

Stimulating the economy of Birmingham and the North through NPR is a good thing and long overdue, but it would be nieve to think that it would not increase demand for people wanting to travel between there and London putting incrased pressure on the exiting WCML.

Delaying phase 1 by a year and merging it with phase 2a would help to address this. Crewe is barely in the North (assuming that Cheshire/Staffordshire border marks the North West - West Midlands border) but there would be a clear improvement from day 1 e.g. Manchester/Liverpool to London/Birmingham. Phase 1 has probably been delayed too much to meet the 2026 target and if the review recommends alterations they could be added to the phase 2a bill as one merged phase.

That is what I think will happen with the planning of Phase 2b to Manchester incorporated into NPR.

 

[CdBrux]

Maybe a bit surprising but it seems the Lib Dems, at least their membership, may not be that hot on the idea of HS2 either judging by this article and many of the comments made underneath:

https://www.libdemvoice.org/say-no-to-hs2-61808.html

I suspect a lot of leading Liberal Democrats have been railway buffs from childhood and will be appalled at the suggestion that the HS2 scheme might be scrapped. I am not a railway buff, though I confess to a brief period as an Iain Allen train spotter.

However, way back in 2014 a fellow Liberal Democrat, Quentin Macdonald, moved a resolution at our Yorkshire and Humberside Region annual conference which proposed what seemed to me a very convincing, and much less costly, alternative which he had developed with another railway expert, Colin Elliff. This they called High Speed UK. It had a much higher degree of connectivity with the existing network than HS2, hence being of much greater value to a whole series of northern towns and cities, rather than just Birmingham, and, if the links ever get built, Manchester, Liverpool, Wigan, Sheffield and Leeds and York.

Details of the scheme can be found here.

Christian Woolmar, sometime aspirant Labour candidate for the mayoralty of London, has a highly critical article in the London Review of Books which is well worth a read, even if he is from another party. Find it here.

My own inexpert opinion is that HS2, if it goes ahead, is more likely to suck enterprise out of our region to London, rather than energise the Northern Powerhouse. I hope our policy teams and influential figures will look at these more reasoned arguments for scrapping the scheme, rather than letting boyhood enthusiasms carry them into supporting what I feel is in essence a vanity project.

* Peter Wrigley is a former candidate in both Westminster and European elections and is currently president of Batley and Spen liberal Democrats

 

[jayah]

Regular reminder that HS2 is replacing WCML Pendolino services, which are already premium priced in the peak. So HS2 is likely to be no more premium priced than the existing railway already is.

LNWR etc are discounters. Virgin Trains charge £90 London Manchester Off Peak Return. Over on the East Coast to Leeds is something like £115 for their regulated Super Off Peak.

They are due to increases one, for WCRM and another for HS2.

 

[jayah]

So far no one has been able to explain how if HS2 is abandoned how will the growth in passenger numbers on the Southern WCML be accommodated? The line is full and there is no room for extra services to be run.

What are the number of passenger journeys anticipated on the opening of phase 1 in 2026 compared to the number of passenger journies today? Aren't we close to hiting the 2026 figures now?

If the government does decide not proceed with HS2 after an anticipated general election this autumn I can see the decision coming back to haunt them in time for the next election in 2024 as the growth in passenger number leads to overcrowding and the problem becomes more acute.

Demand management. We don't forecast 10% compound growth in roads and pledge to double the motorway network every 30 years. It is unaffordable and unsustainable.

The WCML and ECML, MML for that matter have plenty of unused freight paths, not to mention half length passenger trains. There is already plenty that can be done on the supply side before spending some of the eye watering sums now being discussed.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Demand management. We don't forecast 10% compound growth in roads and pledge to double the motorway network every 30 years. It is unaffordable and unsustainable.

The WCML and ECML, MML for that matter have plenty of unused freight paths, not to mention half length passenger trains. There is already plenty that can be done on the supply side before spending some of the eye watering sums now being discussed.

How many unused freight paths are there on the WCML south of Birmingham? How many short trains are there on the Southern WCML, Pendolino's are 9 and 11 car and what length trains does the West Midlands franchise run?

On the MML I can see the scope for infrastructure improvements to increase capacity such as more platforms at Leicester and grade separation of Wigston junction to separate East West flows from the MML fasts and extending the 5 car bimodes to 9 car and hopefully completing the electrification to Leicester, Deby, Nottinam, Sheffield and Leeds eventually.

On the ECML the Warrington grade separation will improve capacity for fright and a flyover for the Nottingham to Lincoln line at Newark could be built to remove that pitch point though there is still the Welwyn viaduct on the Southern ECML (conveniently the local MP is the current Secretary of State for Transport so he should understand the problems of that bottleneck). I have no idea what the cost of building a second viaduct would be.

The above would waken the business case for the Eastern arm but will have no impact on the London -Birmingham phase 1 or Birmingham - Crewe phase 2a.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Maybe a bit surprising but it seems the Lib Dems, at least their membership, may not be that hot on the idea of HS2 either judging by this article and many of the comments made underneath:
https://www.libdemvoice.org/say-no-to-hs2-61808.html

4-track main line Old Oak/Brent Cross to Yorkshire following the M1.
Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool on spurs (the last 2 via a "Woodhead Tunnel".
If HS2 could be described as a "West Coast"-oriented scheme, this one is focussed firmly on Yorkshire; Liverpool involves a 75-mile loop east before heading for London.
It avoids the cost of new stations by simply asserting that the existing stations can cope if the routes are upgraded.
No Euston or Chiltern tunnels (except a bit under Luton).
UK gauge, 300km/h classic compatible trains.

I don't see how a 4-track spine is going to come in any cheaper than HS2.
The French have said that building LGV Nord next to the A1 autoroute gave them serious problems and cost increases, because of all the pre-existing road junctions and associated "spaghetti".
Old Oak will have to be much bigger if it is to be a terminus (same is true with HS2 if they lop off the Euston link).
It's all 10-15 years away as there has been no design, consultation or land purchase, and no parliamentary approval.
I think I prefer HS2.

 

[MotorcycleAlan]

Would it be an idea to copy and paste the 107 pages of argument here:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-hs2-and-other-hs2-discussion.177112/page-106
And then just discuss the review here? At the end of the day the same people, either for or against, are trotting out the same arguments and will not be persuaded to change their views. As an ordinary rail user, I have no idea who is right, but hope there are wiser more knowledgeable people who will make the right decision (and soon) for the benefit of a vast proportion of the population. Clearly some on here are wise and knowledgeable, but most of us can only have opinions, and often ill-informed. Now where has that happened before?

 

[The Ham]

So far no one has been able to explain how if HS2 is abandoned how will the growth in passenger numbers on the Southern WCML be accommodated? The line is full and there is no room for extra services to be run.

What are the number of passenger journeys anticipated on the opening of phase 1 in 2026 compared to the number of passenger journies today? Aren't we close to hiting the 2026 figures now?

If the government does decide not proceed with HS2 after an anticipated general election this autumn I can see the decision coming back to haunt them in time for the next election in 2024 as the growth in passenger number leads to overcrowding and the problem becomes more acute.

Depends on which flows you look at. Overall London to all key regions to benefit from HS2 then we're broadly on track compared to 2026. However on some flows (London West Midlands or London North West) then the figures are about 1 million / 10% over above.

That does mean that London East Midlands is below predictions, however it's an enroute location meaning that it's less critical that it hits the targets. Having said that it would be interesting to see the outcome from the new EMR franchise is.

 

[class26]

So far no one has been able to explain how if HS2 is abandoned how will the growth in passenger numbers on the Southern WCML be accommodated? The line is full and there is no room for extra services to be run.

What are the number of passenger journeys anticipated on the opening of phase 1 in 2026 compared to the number of passenger journies today? Aren't we close to hiting the 2026 figures now?

If the government does decide not proceed with HS2 after an anticipated general election this autumn I can see the decision coming back to haunt them in time for the next election in 2024 as the growth in passenger number leads to overcrowding and the problem becomes more acute.

They haven`t explained because they can`t. Binning HS2 only means we have to start again, more consultants reports, endless debates , millions spent and not an inch of new railway built. The only beneficiaries will be the consultants

 

[jayah]

How many unused freight paths are there on the WCML south of Birmingham? How many short trains are there on the Southern WCML, Pendolino's are 9 and 11 car and what length trains does the West Midlands franchise run?

On the MML I can see the scope for infrastructure improvements to increase capacity such as more platforms at Leicester and grade separation of Wigston junction to separate East West flows from the MML fasts and extending the 5 car bimodes to 9 car and hopefully completing the electrification to Leicester, Deby, Nottinam, Sheffield and Leeds eventually.

On the ECML the Warrington grade separation will improve capacity for fright and a flyover for the Nottingham to Lincoln line at Newark could be built to remove that pitch point though there is still the Welwyn viaduct on the Southern ECML (conveniently the local MP is the current Secretary of State for Transport so he should understand the problems of that bottleneck). I have no idea what the cost of building a second viaduct would be.

The above would waken the business case for the Eastern arm but will have no impact on the London -Birmingham phase 1 or Birmingham - Crewe phase 2a.

Even outside the school holidays during the daytime around a third of freight paths are not used.

Around a third of Pendonlinos are 9 cars.

Around a third of peak LNWR commuter trains are 12 cars.

Everything on the DC lines is half length.

And that is before you get started on Hull Trains or East Midlands.

Lots of headroom on the supply side, after which demand management should be the next port of call.

 

[Ianno87]

Lots of headroom on the supply side, after which demand management should be the next port of call.

Demand management being a euphamism for fares rises, of course. Not economically sustainable for UK plc.

 

[6Gman]

Everything on the DC lines is half length.

Most of the platforms appear to be c.120m. How long are these "half length" trains? 60m?

 

[mmh]

Most of the platforms appear to be c.120m. How long are these "half length" trains? 60m?

Almost, approx 80m, 4x20m cars. 4tph, only recently increased from 3tph. Plus 6tph Bakerloo line trains between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone.

 

[Doomotron]

I honestly think that cancelling HS2 would be the most humiliating decision this country has ever made. They've spent all if this money (albeit a very fishy amount) for a line that will bring huge benefits to the whole country... And the government wants it cancelled. This is ridiculous. Absolute rubbish.

There's two reasons I won't vote in the future (if they happen): dropping Brexit, and cancelling HS2.

Spoiler

And don't even think about making an unnecessary comment about Brexit 'ruining the country' or High Speed 2 being 'pointless'.

I'll preempt one of the probable apologist replies to that - the Scotrail 170s which moved to Southern.

They weren't just refurbished, the entire interior was replaced to be identical to Southern's 171s. Even as an enthusiast the way to spot them is a different headlamp cluster.

Except the awful refurbishment where SC only put the wrinkly covers over the old Scotrail moquette.

 

[Yossarian22]

Honestly couldn’t be happier. I adore high speed rail and wish the UK would get on with it and build a nationwide system but HS2 was and is in my opinion the wrong design for the UK

 

[mmh]

A pretty damning article on the BBC News website - "Ministers and HS2 bosses knew railway was over budget years ago"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49450297

The government and HS2 knew that the new high speed railway was over budget and was probably behind schedule years ago, documents seen by the BBC show.

Crucially, the documents were written in 2016, before MPs had signed-off the first phase of the project.

It is evidence that both the public and Parliament were not given the full picture about the true cost.

The Department for Transport said: "Like all major, complex projects delivery plans evolve over time."

"We regularly keep Parliament and members of the public updated on the progress of the project," the DfT added.

HS2 Ltd is a public company, set-up to build a new high-speed line linking London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. It is funded by the taxpayer.

The line was due to be built in two phases, beginning with a new railway linking London and the West Midlands.

This would be followed by a second phase taking services from Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds.

Phase one of the development was due to open at the end of 2026, with the second phase scheduled for completion by 2032-33.

In total, the railway was supposed to cost £55.7bn.

Earlier this month, the government said it planned to review the costs and benefits of the rail project, with a "go or no-go" decision by the end of the year.

But until recently, ministers and bosses at HS2 have insisted everything was on track.

Only last month, the transport minister, Nusrat Ghani MP, who is now a government whip, told Parliament "confidently" that the programme would be delivered on budget and on time.

"There is only one budget for HS2 and it is £55.7bn," she said.

But the documents obtained by BBC News show that at least three years ago both the government and HS2 knew that wasn't the case.

In May 2016, then chancellor George Osborne received a letter from Patrick McLoughlin, the transport secretary at the time, in which he admitted that the first stretch of the railway was already a billion pounds over budget.

The budget for phase one of HS2, linking London to Birmingham, is £24bn.

However a former HS2 director told the BBC that the £1bn overspend was considered, at the time, to be "a very conservative estimate."

"Internally the teams knew it was a lot higher than that," he added.

The £1bn overspend is worse than it first seems because it did not include a realistic estimate for how much the land and property needed to build the railway would cost.

The estimate for land and property which HS2 was using at the time for the London-Birmingham stretch was £2.8bn.

The consultancy firm PwC found that "fundamental parts" of that estimate had been calculated in an "ad-hoc manner", according to a report seen by the BBC.

And two senior figures who worked in the Land and Property department at HS2 from August 2015 to April 2016 calculated that, in reality, the true cost was £4.8bn.

That would have added a further £2bn, taking the total overspend at the time on phase one of the project to at least £3bn.

The May 2016 letter to George Osborne also shows that a one-year delay to the opening of phase one was already being considered as it could "bring cost savings."

Cost was, in the words of the then transport secretary, "a significant challenge."

The letter also reveals that, at that time, HS2 failed a critical hurdle called Review Point One.

According to a former HS2 director that "was like saying it wasn't fit for purpose."

The BBC has also obtained a Department for Transport briefing note labelled as "confidential", written in December 2016.

The document acknowledges that even with planned savings "a significant gap to target price will remain."

And it says, following alterations to the scheme, phase one of HS2 would need to open a year late.

The situation has become a lot worse since the two documents were written.

Last month, a leaked letter suggested that HS2 could be up to £30bn over its budget.

But in December of last year, HS2's chief executive, Mark Thurston, was still insisting everything was fine.

"We're confident we have a good estimate for the first phase," he told BBC Panorama.

"We are not over budget."

The Department for Transport memo also states that there is a relatively small chance that the stretch of the railway, linking Birmingham to Crewe, which is known as phase 2a, would be delivered on time.

It puts the probability of that happening at a mere 35%.

The Crewe to Birmingham stretch is due to run trains from December 2027.

In a statement to the BBC, HS2 Ltd said it had "provided regular updates on the project".

It said there had been "extensive scrutiny" from the National Audit Office and Parliamentary Committees.

And it said that chief executive Mark Thurston had "spoken publicly for some time about the cost pressures facing the project".

Mr Thurston was appointed as HS2's chief executive in March 2017.

His predecessor, Simon Kirby, said during his tenure HS2 Ltd "operated fully transparently in respect of the Department for Transport who were kept fully appraised of all relevant information on the cost and timetable of the project."

 

[The Ham]

A pretty damning article on the BBC News website - "Ministers and HS2 bosses knew railway was over budget years ago"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49450297

Land purchase being over the final budget, doesn't mean that it will be overall.

For instance some homes were brought early and rented out, so that income would reduce the final cost.

Some homes could have been brought so as to facilitate the construction (read be too noisy during construction), but aren't needed long term, as such can be sold on. Again reducing the final costs.

Even then, assuming a doubling of property purchase costs from £2.5bn to £5bn, that doesn't mean that there's not cost savings (from the contingency budget) which could result in the scheme coming in on budget.

Of course, if there's scope to do so, it could also be possible to sell surplus land or building rights over land to gain back more money.

Anyway such stories need to be read in the context of the £7bn of spend to date. In that if the extra between the two is for all the other stuff, then there's been quite a lot done for ~£2bn.

 

[daodao]

.... that's why HS2 is planned to go to Manchester Piccadilly and just south of Wigan.

The bottom line is the bottom line - post Brexit, the current HS2 plans are unaffordable, so the project needs to be drastically pruned, if not cancelled.

 

[The Ham]

Worst case estimates of £85 billion refer to the whole project (not just London to Brum) - though the current budget is actually £56 billion. I think the original estimate for Phase 1 for just the infrastructure was around £17 billion.

The point is, its not as if the UK has had no experience of building high speed rail lines. The whole 70 miles of HS1 cost under £6 billion, and that included rebuilding St Pancras, loads of tunnelling and getting the line through the "Garden of England". HS2, involving the construction of 350 miles of new line, is around 5 times as large a project, and therefore without adjusting for inflation, should come out at around £30 billion.

However allowing for inflation to 2018 get to £41bn.

Allow a contingency of 60% and you're up to £65bn

Add in £7.5bn for the rolling stock and your to to £72.5bn.

That's not a million miles adrift from the up to £85bn being quoted. With the difference probably needed to allow for inflation between now and the final "cash" cost for construction completed in the 2030's.

As such, and using the cost of HS1 as a baseline, comparable.

In theory less than all of the contingency could be used which would bring the costs down from that ceiling cost.

 

[The Ham]

The bottom line is the bottom line - post Brexit, the current HS2 plans are unaffordable, so the project needs to be drastically pruned, if not cancelled.

If the economy tanks post Brexit, then building infrastructure is a good way to stimulate it.

Doing so does employees people, those people pay for things (putting money into the economy) and pay taxes (which go straight back to the government).

The money which had gone into the economy is in turn used to pay more people who pay for things and pay taxes.

Which stimulates the economy further and there's further money to pay yet more people and yet more taxes.

As such, and especially if it keeps people from having to claim benefits, the true cost to the government is never £1 for each £1 spent.