edwin_m
Veteran Member
I think that can be addressed by saying you'd provisionally commit the maximum amount of money in say 10 years time that would result in a worthwhile business case. If as the scheme developed the forecast cost came down, then some of the future funding could be released for other purposes. If it went outside those limits (due to higher costs or lower benefits) then the funding would be cancelled and the promoters would have to look for means of improving the scheme to get it back in the queue.The issue is that the costs for, say, the design and implementation stage are essentially unknown at the start of the process. It’s pretty much impossible to do a reliable estimate (even to +/-50%) until feasibility is done. For government to commit construction funding at an early stage, when realistically you don’t know what you are committing to in terms of costs or outputs, is not a good use of public funds.
Similarly - and this is an issue affecting several projects right now - is that Government is bound to operate in spending review periods. It can not commit to funding any project beyond the Spending review period except in special circumstances - usually for big landmark projects taking 5 years or more (Crossrail, aircraft carriers, that sort of thing). Even Thameslink was held up by the spending review, just as HS2 is now. And on top of that!right now, we have election uncertainty and Br**it uncertainty which means the government is unwilling to commit anything on anything!
Most rail projects probably qualify as being "big" and "landmark" and need some certainty of long-term funding before promotors commit (their money, usually not central government's) to development. And the presumption that the scheme would continue unless it missed its cost/benefit target or was actively stopped ought to help to take things out of the political arena once the initial decision was made. I said "provisional" and politicians would still have a right to cancel a scheme at any stage, but would have to actively do that and face the political consequences rather than just letting it lapse and leaving everyone in limbo. As to spending reviews, design work on HS2 continues despite it being under review. Once design has started, stopping and restarting will always cost more than letting a scheme continue while its future is under review.