More Delay for HS2, and how should we proceed?

[LNW-GW Joint]

Are the Euston tunnels still going ahead, at least the civils for them? The HS2 website has them starting in 2024 and seems to suggest some procurement has already been done

There's no reason to suppose they are not.
The same contractor (SCSJV) is doing all the London tunnels, and has started on the Northolt West bore (from West Ruislip).
Northolt East is due to start from OOC by the end of this year, and both bores are essential to complete the route into OOC.
The Euston tunnels are due to start from the OOC end early in 2024, but first an access tunnel has to be bored across the OOC site so they can launch and supply the TBMs.
All that has to be completed before services into OOC can start.
All 10 Phase 1 TBMs are on order and in stages of construction and delivery to site, if not already in use.
The next TBM to start up, in a few months, will be at Bromford on the Birmingham branch.

 

[Dan G]

I too am puzzled by Euston. The site is obviously more constrained than OOC, and more complex in terms of logistics, but it isn't that difficult a site, certainly no worse than building a skyscraper in the City. OOC is going to be done in 4-5 years if all goes to plan. Tunnelling to Euston is about a two-year job, so not on the critical path. The site has been cleared, it is being excavated and piled, so what is possibly going to take 11 years to achieve?

The whole "rephasing" thing is about reducing government spending in each financial year in order to finance tax cuts while staying within the government's arbitrary "fiscal rules", even though extending a project's timescale incurs a higher total cost due to inflation.

I do not understand the logic in delaying the opening of the new HS2 Euston station for such an extended period. A central London terminus is critical to the success of HS2. By contrast, the branch from Crewe to Manchester (phase 2b) is secondary, and won't be value for money as it will be used by less than a handful of trains per hour and requires expensive tunnelling in South Manchester from the proposed new station at Hale Barns northwards.

I would argue that opening up working in Manchester and living in Birmingham (/vice versa) to many more people is of more value than reducing journey times between Birmingham and London.

I thought part of the delay was due to them deciding that rebuilding Euston in two parts was massively more expensive?

Yes, building it one go is cheaper than in two stages. But see above.

 

[Sussex Star]

So the way I read it the plan is now:

By 2033: Just 3 tph Birmingham-OOC

By 2035/6: rising to 6 tph by adding a service each via Crewe from Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow, still terminating at OOC. With or without Handsacre link.

By ?: 10 tph full west coast service when Euston opens.

By early 2040s: Crewe to Manchester high speed line opens and still possibly East Midlands spur

 

[bob007]

I would argue that opening up working in Manchester and living in Birmingham (/vice versa) to many more people is of more value than reducing journey times between Birmingham and London.

Agreed.

And also: that the only service between our 2nd and 3rd largest cities is an hourly (peak 2tph) CrossCountry service is a national embarrassment.

 

[Xavi]

The Euston tunnels are due to start from the OOC end early in 2024, but first an access tunnel has to be bored across the OOC site so they can launch and supply the TBMs.
All that has to be completed before services into OOC can start.

Indeed, you can’t open OOC before the TBMs have been launched. And yet we have speculation that Euston will open 10 or more years after OOC. Couldn’t make it up. On the other hand DfT and Treasury calling the tunes…

 

[stuu]

Indeed, you can’t open OOC before the TBMs have been launched. And yet we have speculation that Euston will open 10 or more years after OOC. Couldn’t make it up. On the other hand DfT and Treasury calling the tunes…

The actual Minister for Transport said

At the same time, the government will take the time to ensure an affordable and deliverable design at Euston, with a view to delivering the station alongside high-speed infrastructure to Manchester.

This sentence can easily be interpreted as meaning the station won't be opened until the section to Manchester is finished. If it doesn't, it's an extremely ambiguous way to phrase it

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

So the way I read it the plan is now:

By 2033: Just 3 tph Birmingham-OOC

By 2035/6: rising to 6 tph by adding a service each via Crewe from Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow, still terminating at OOC. With or without Handsacre link.

By ?: 10 tph full west coast service when Euston opens.

By early 2040s: Crewe to Manchester high speed line opens and still possibly East Midlands spur

No one knows what the plan is as its years away but it will be better than that

 

[JonathanH]

I know someone very senior on the inside of the Euston JV and they were told they have started demobilising their staff, down to a skeleton

How would that play out? Is one theory that construction of Old Oak Common will be more expensive if Euston is being built at the same time?

I seem to recall that one of the reasons for delay and expense on Crossrail was that the Tottenham Hotspur stadium was forcing up demand for electricians. It would seem that building two large stations at the same time not too far from each other might lead to scarcity of relevant qualified construction workers.

 

[Xavi]

My understanding of the emerging revised outline programme.
Finish OOC box 23/24. Euston enabling works to continue but with later completion.
Launch Euston TBM 24.
Complete OOC (and NR station) by 28/29.
Complete Euston by 32/33 (not 2040s).

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It was only just over 4mths ago that the SoS updated parliament that all was rosy on HS2 yet uncertainty now reigns.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/high-speed-two-6-monthly-report-to-parliament-october-2022

HS2 Ltd has drawn £1.5 billion of its £5.6 billion delegated contingency for phase 1, an increase of £0.2 billion since the last update, leaving about £4 billion.

HS2 Ltd is projecting around £1.9 billion of net additional cost pressures on phase 1, an increase of about £0.2 billion since March.

Yes cost pressures were highlighted but they were well contained within project contingency. This programme is populated with vast numbers of (well paid) commercial teams to keep on top of this and provide accurate forecasts so Im looking forward to his next report to explain away whats gone wrong over the last few months.

 

[Dan G]

It's not a huge secret that this government wants to promise a tax cut ahead of the next general election. To do that the chancellor needs to stay within his "fiscal rules" for the next five years, i.e. out to 2028/9. Not spending a billion a year building the Euston HS2 station towards the end of that period is very helpful.

 

[PG]

The actual Minister for Transport said

At the same time, the government will take the time to ensure an affordable and deliverable design at Euston, with a view to delivering the station alongside high-speed infrastructure to Manchester.

This sentence can easily be interpreted as meaning the station won't be opened until the section to Manchester is finished. If it doesn't, it's an extremely ambiguous way to phrase it

That phrase, will take the time, implies that up until now they've rushed things along with back of an envelope planning! Tantamount to a slap in the face for all those involved in the development of the project as if they are all hopelessly incompetent...

 

[railfan99]

The people moving north and the jobs remaining south may not be great for those areas - pressure on houses, services, etc but lots of money remaining spent in London rather than in the new dormitory areas. WFH may mitigate this of course.

That's not borne out by experience in other nations where high speed rail has been built. And who says some jobs won't 'migrate north'?

Surely HS2 will be a boon for cities that it serves? It make iving one of your cities/areas away from Greater London more attractive.

 

[zwk500]

That phrase, will take the time, implies that up until now they've rushed things along with back of an envelope planning! Tantamount to a slap in the face for all those involved in the development of the project as if they are all hopelessly incompetent...

Hardly the first time the government has thrown the rail industry under the bus.

 

[Xavi]

It's not a huge secret that this government wants to promise a tax cut ahead of the next general election. To do that the chancellor needs to stay within his "fiscal rules" for the next five years, i.e. out to 2028/9. Not spending a billion a year building the Euston HS2 station towards the end of that period is very helpful.

Yes, the Treasury’s motive indeed and yet since 2015 construction output prices are up 36% and government spending is up 40%. HS2 paying the price for government incompetence.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Yes, the Treasury’s motive indeed and yet since 2015 construction output prices are up 36% and government spending is up 40%. HS2 paying the price for government incompetence.

Indeed the problem DfT has is Treasury wont compensate for inflation so this is restricting uncommitted capex funds over next few years. So my take is Torys need to maximise good news stories in advance of general election so need to allocate what funds are left into projects that can be used for electioneering purposes. So reckon we will have some projects confirmed at next weeks budget to neutralise the negative HS2 story.

 

[Mikey C]

Indeed the problem DfT has is Treasury wont compensate for inflation so this is restricting uncommitted capex funds over next few years. So my take is Torys need to maximise good news stories in advance of general election so need to allocate what funds are left into projects that can be used for electioneering purposes. So reckon we will have some projects confirmed at next weeks budget to neutralise the negative HS2 story.

But it's not just HS2. The Lower Thames Crossing and Stonehenge tunnel have also been delayed.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But it's not just HS2. The Lower Thames Crossing and Stonehenge tunnel have also been delayed.

Indeed all long burn projects that dont have any impact on the North

 

[AndrewE]

Indeed all long burn projects that dont have any impact on the North

Do you think postponing HS2 doesn't impact the north?

 

[zwk500]

Indeed all long burn projects that dont have any impact on the North

The North is of course getting TRU, which is a major upgrade to a key mainline in the region connecting all but 1 of the largest settlements on the M62 corridor. (It should have been done in the 80s but that's beside the point). Sheffield, bereft of TRU upgrades does also get it's own upgrade to the Hope Valley Line.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Do you think postponing HS2 doesn't impact the north?

Of course but when money is tight and a general election is looming better to promise something that is deliverable in a few years than something that is decade plus away.

Personally the 5B/yr HS2 is costing would have bought far better local improvement to services to all the Norths large cities than HS2 will ever deliver for them but thats for another thread.

 

[BrianW]

The North is of course getting TRU, which is a major upgrade to a key mainline in the region connecting all but 1 of the largest settlements on the M62 corridor. (It should have been done in the 80s but that's beside the point). Sheffield, bereft of TRU upgrades does also get it's own upgrade to the Hope Valley Line.

IIRC the most relevant marginals are the North East, South Yorks, Derbyshire, Bury, Burnley, Bolton, North Wales - 'improving services and opening up job opportunities across the north and midlands'- I think we know those lines ...

 

[Killingworth]

The North is of course getting TRU, which is a major upgrade to a key mainline in the region connecting all but 1 of the largest settlements on the M62 corridor. (It should have been done in the 80s but that's beside the point). Sheffield, bereft of TRU upgrades does also get it's own upgrade to the Hope Valley Line.

TRU is now supposed to include the South Pennine upgrade. At the time of the first round of pubic consultations in 2013 that was supposed to provide an additional 2 fast passenger paths an hour through the Valley. By the third round in 2015 and the public inquiry in 2016 that had been reduced to one extra path.

The Integrated Rail Plan for the North strongly suggests that even that one extra fast path cannot be provided any time soon.

3.93 Works to improve the Hope Valley line are already underway, including line speed and capacity works,
the removal of a bottleneck at Dore, and provision of a
freight loop at Bamford. These works could help facilitate
a possible future third fast Sheffield to Manchester
service each hour.
3.94 Network Rail’s capacity analysis suggests that three NPR
trains per hour between Manchester and Sheffield can be
operated via the Hope Valley Line with trains continuing
to Stockport through targeted investment, using the
existing Network Rail station at Manchester Piccadilly.
This would likely require the doubling of the Hazel Grove
chord (to enable three trains to be evenly spaced, around
every 20 minutes) and restoration of a third line between
Dore and Sheffield, although more detailed analysis is
needed to confirm this. The infrastructure required on
the Hope Valley route itself is potentially similar if four fast
NPR trains are planned. However, operating a fourth train
via Stockport into the existing Piccadilly station would
require either a major package of interventions on the
existing railway or a reduction in other services in the
Manchester area.

So 2030 at the earliest?

However, the market has changed over the last 3 years. Commuter and business loadings are severely reduced yet leisure is up. Currently there's a 4 car EMR hourly service between the 2 cities. There's an erratic 3 or 6 car TPE service some hours provided in somewhat random fashion. The usually lower priced Northern 3 car stopping service via Marple is proving popular with end to end users, often full and standing due to failings of the others. Before expecting a third fast service more reliable and longer trains are needed to win traffic back.

There's an hourly stopping service between New Mills and Piccadilly that lays over for over half an hour at New Mills. It would cost a lot less to extend them, possibly skipping stops to avoid freight conflicts. It might be possible to do it with one extra unit and crew. In view of frequent delays (and cancellations) by the two fairly fast train operators that back up would be very useful - and allow users wanting the Hope Valley stations a better chance of finding a seat, and in a few cases ability to board a train at all.

 

[stuu]

But it's not just HS2. The Lower Thames Crossing and Stonehenge tunnel have also been delayed.

When did they mention Stonehenge? That wasn't in the statement

 

[Energy]

Personally the 5B/yr HS2 is costing would have bought far better local improvement to services to all the Norths large cities than HS2 will ever deliver for them but thats for another thread.

Please can we kill off this idea that there is a pot of money to be freely spent so HS2 money can be diverted. If there is a good business case for improvements up north both can be done at the same time if the treasury wasn't limiting capital spending.

 

[zwk500]

Please can we kill off this idea that there is a pot of money to be freely spent so HS2 money can be diverted. If there is a good business case for improvements up north both can be done at the same time if the treasury wasn't limiting capital spending.

It's kind of true both ways though - because the treasury is limiting borrowing, the money that's being borrowed to pay for HS2 is eating into the effective credit limit which limits borrowing to pay for improvements in the north. You are absolutely right that if the government got rid of that artificial limit, then HS2 would be independent of other Capex spending.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Please can we kill off this idea that there is a pot of money to be freely spent so HS2 money can be diverted. If there is a good business case for improvements up north both can be done at the same time if the treasury wasn't limiting capital spending.

I was saying that the 5B/yr HS2 is costing could have bought a lot more local infrastructure improvement around the Northern cities to benefit a much wider section of the population. Anyhow getting off topic.

 

[Nottingham59]

If there is a good business case for improvements up north both can be done at the same time

Let's kill off the idea that there was a good business case for HS2. It only ever qualified as "low" or "low to medium" value for money, and that was dependent on (1) building the full Y-network, which has now been killed off; and (2) inventing so-called "Wider Economic Impacts" of HS2, without ever comparing those WEIs with the economic impacts that alternative rail investments would have brought.

 

[HSTEd]

I was saying that the 5B/yr HS2 is costing could have bought a lot more local infrastructure improvement around the Northern cities to benefit a much wider section of the population. Anyhow getting off topic.

Would it?

The money would likely have disappeared into the subsidy pit on short-term service improvements (the kind that appeal to short-termist politicians), none of which would have been sustainable in the long run.

The reality is that infrastructure is expensive, and our hard-earned experience of railway upgrades is that they have repeatedly turned into debacles.
When was the last time a rail upgrade programme actually delivered what it was supposed to on something resembling its planned budget and schedule?

Maybe Evergreen on the Chiltern? That is the only one since privatisation that comes to mind, and it was also a very unambitious programme compared to the others.

But I agree, getting off topic.

 

[Mikey C]

It's kind of true both ways though - because the treasury is limiting borrowing, the money that's being borrowed to pay for HS2 is eating into the effective credit limit which limits borrowing to pay for improvements in the north. You are absolutely right that if the government got rid of that artificial limit, then HS2 would be independent of other Capex spending.

But it's not true to say that there's no limit to capital spending, and the markets would allow us to borrow as much as we like. The borrowing limit might be higher than what the treasury is currently, but it's not infinite.

Plus there are resource constraints as well. If too much of the construction sector was given over to rail improvements, then that would impact on the available resources to build houses, hospitals, power stations etc.