Restarting HS2a

[MidlandMainlie]

Most energy policy and transport policy wonks (including myself on the former category) have enough project proposals to fill whole books.
There is no shortage of possible schemes, and resources are not unlimited.

HS2 Phase 2A doesn't even have a particularly good BCR.

Fair points and Labours plans to decarbonise through renewables will generate jobs and growth. However as has been mentioned uptread the truncation of phase 2A and the capacity bottlenecks on the WCML mean that the Government faces a choice either build 2A as planned or expensive and disruptive upgrades to the WCML to allow the increase in capacity north of Handsacre. It doesn’t look like there is a do nothing scenario for the government here and once phase 1 is completed it risks become a drag on growth as the current plans have less capacity into Manchester due to the shorter HS2 trains.

 

[Sorcerer]

Would there be any reason to believe HS2a would face the same cost and planning issues as Phase 1? As I understand it a lot of the extra expenses there was with the planning and building with Euston, and in fact any additional phases in future will definitely see more spent on Euston to increase potential capacity at that station instead of the current six platforms planned. I imagine many issues of 2a would be surrounding Manchester Piccadilly HS2 station.

 

[Elecman]

Would there be any reason to believe HS2a would face the same cost and planning issues as Phase 1? As I understand it a lot of the extra expenses there was with the planning and building with Euston, and in fact any additional phases in future will definitely see more spent on Euston to increase potential capacity at that station instead of the current six platforms planned. I imagine many issues of 2a would be surrounding Manchester Piccadilly HS2 station.

Phase 2a doesn’t go to Manchester only to Crewe

 

[MidlandMainlie]

The Sunak notion when he cancelled HS2a/b was that the money would be spent on other transport priorities which would be delivered quicker - "Network North".
This included action on bus fares, potholes and a rigmarole of minor local transport improvements countrywide.
Some of those projects have already started - ie the money is already being spent.

Before the new DfT pronounces on HS2a/b, it will have to review "Network North" and decide how to deal with the promises made for that programme.
I think Louise Haigh and Rachel Reeves will take their time to decide if and how to progress HS2, while at the same time not doing anything stupid such as selling off land earmarked under the existing legislation.
I'd have thought the Autumn Statement is where we might find some initial answers, but the big numbers will have to wait till the next spending review.
The King's Speech at the opening of the next parliament might also give some clues.

HS2 Phase 2a was supposed to be costed better than phase1, because it is mostly on the surface with more measurable contractor costs, and no stations.
The aim was for some of the contracts to be across both phase 1 and 2a (eg the railway construction), with economies of scale.
That isn't now happening, thanks to Sunak - and Phase 1's railway contracts still haven't been let.
There's bound to be a big investigation of HS2 costs, before any major new contracts are let.

I think that is a fair approach but any decision on 2A will have to take into account the cost of alternatives such as upgrades between Handsacre and Crewe

 

[Sorcerer]

Phase 2a doesn’t go to Manchester only to Crewe

Oh my mistake, I thought 2a was to Manchester and 2b was to Leeds. I assume Manchester is 2b and Leeds was 2c?

 

[JamesT]

Oh my mistake, I thought 2a was to Manchester and 2b was to Leeds. I assume Manchester is 2b and Leeds was 2c?

Leeds was the Eastern leg of 2. 2a to Crewe was only split out when it was realised some of the benefits could be realised earlier by completed it as a distinct entity.

 

[Energy]

ie the money is already being spent.

It hasn't. The HS2 2b money doesn't exist yet as construction wasn't due to start until late 2020s, the bill hasn't gotten through the house yet.

2a may have had some of the money reassigned but it's a couple billion at most. Infrastructure can be funded via government debt which is paid back by the project later, or just comes out of tax so the government doesn't need to pay the interest later on. Its unclear which one of those HS2 is.

Would there be any reason to believe HS2a would face the same cost and planning issues as Phase 1? As I understand it a lot of the extra expenses there was with the planning and building with Euston, and in fact any additional phases in future will definitely see more spent on Euston to increase potential capacity at that station instead of the current six platforms planned. I imagine many issues of 2a would be surrounding Manchester Piccadilly HS2 station.

2a should be easier, it follows a route similar to the WCML, is more above ground, and the people of Crewe seem far more welcoming of HS2 (and its money) than Euston.

I think that is a fair approach but any decision on 2A will have to take into account the cost of alternatives such as upgrades between Handsacre and Crewe

Which are very unlikely to be cheaper and will take longer. Any sensible transport advisor would recommend the best way of dealing with the WCML there is to progress with 2a.

I think Louise Haigh and Rachel Reeves will take their time to decide if and how to progress HS2, while at the same time not doing anything stupid such as selling off land earmarked under the existing legislation.

HS2 will undoubtedly be on Haigh's mind and I wouldn't expect an announcement soon but I agree that land sell-offs are incredibly unlikely.

Oh my mistake, I thought 2a was to Manchester and 2b was to Leeds. I assume Manchester is 2b and Leeds was 2c?

Phase 1 was London - Birmingham, phase 2 was to Manchester via Crewe & Leeds via East Midlands & Sheffield. Phase 2 was split into 2a (Crewe) and 2b (Manchester, East Midlands, Sheffield, Leeds) when it was realised that phase 1+2a was far more useful than just 1.

 

[JonathanH]

However as has been mentioned uptread the truncation of phase 2A and the capacity bottlenecks on the WCML mean that the Government faces a choice either build 2A as planned or expensive and disruptive upgrades to the WCML to allow the increase in capacity north of Handsacre.

Pricing off demand is the third option. It is not clear that this would be anathema to even a Labour administration watching the purse strings with other priorities.

 

[Sorcerer]

Leeds was the Eastern leg of 2. 2a to Crewe was only split out when it was realised some of the benefits could be realised earlier by completed it as a distinct entity.

Phase 1 was London - Birmingham, phase 2 was to Manchester via Crewe & Leeds via East Midlands & Sheffield. Phase 2 was split into 2a (Crewe) and 2b (Manchester, East Midlands, Sheffield, Leeds) when it was realised that phase 1+2a was far more useful than just 1.

Thanks to you both for the clarification! Indeed the section to Crewe does bring it's own benefits as it's own line compared to being part of a single route to Manchester.

 

[HSTEd]

Would there be any reason to believe HS2a would face the same cost and planning issues as Phase 1? As I understand it a lot of the extra expenses there was with the planning and building with Euston, and in fact any additional phases in future will definitely see more spent on Euston to increase potential capacity at that station instead of the current six platforms planned. I imagine many issues of 2a would be surrounding Manchester Piccadilly HS2 station.

The cost issues with Phase 1 stretch far beyond Euston. Euston price has gone up a few billion, a small fraction of the cost growth since HS2 was approved.

Fair points and Labours plans to decarbonise through renewables will generate jobs and growth. However as has been mentioned uptread the truncation of phase 2A and the capacity bottlenecks on the WCML mean that the Government faces a choice either build 2A as planned or expensive and disruptive upgrades to the WCML to allow the increase in capacity north of Handsacre. It doesn’t look like there is a do nothing scenario for the government here and once phase 1 is completed it risks become a drag on growth as the current plans have less capacity into Manchester due to the shorter HS2 trains.

Well cost increases and reduction in the off-peak peak-price spread would allow significant improvements in the crowding levels on the route, by spreading traffic more evenly across the day and reducing demand.

In extremis there are other measures that could be considered, for example using aggressive pricing to force more of the traffic between London and the North through Birmingham.
The government could also just tolerate overcrowding on the WCML in the same way that chronic overcrowding has historically been tolerated on other parts of the network.]

EDIT: Simplified the statement on HS2 Phase 1 cost growth

 

[Dr Hoo]

Is it sensibly possible to re-start Phase 2a without also re- starting Old Oak Common-Euston (or does the latter deserve a distinct thread)?

My thoughts include the wider aspects of ‘planning reform’ and a major programme of house building (let alone schools, hospitals and so on). Would planning reform include making it ‘easier’ to build vital national infrastructure such as sewerage systems, nuclear power stations, complete new towns, etc.? Could this embrace far more straightforward processes for new rail projects, e.g. no hybrid bills and much simpler Transport & Works Act, environmental assessments and the like?
Basically a much more wholistic approach to ‘getting stuff built’, accompanied by a massive ramp up in building and engineering training for the UK workforce. Not just high speed rail.

 

[Mikey C]

2a makes a lot of sense, but we more urgently need an answer on the Euston terminus.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It showed up in the Lib Dems’

Ah, thanks.

Faster services get more efficient use of a given pool of crew and rolling stock due to reduced round trip time; more round trips can be accomplished during a typical work shift.

Your argument could be largely correct but will the decision makers work that out ?. Especially if the electorate don't want to see that.

Once Phase 1 is finished, no one will consider it anything but an integral part of the national infrastructure. Who is moaning about the original price of Crossrail now the Elizabeth Line is up and running and attracting unprecedented numbers of new riders to London's rail network? That Phase 1 will exist will make the business case for further extensions extremely attractive.

Yes we will have to wait and see Phase1 bear fruit. But I fear that will be a long time before it is so obvious that it cannot be ignored - certainly no possibility of continuity of the project to Phase2a.

2a makes a lot of sense, but we more urgently need an answer on the Euston terminus.

There is a "ha'penny worth of tar" to be saved there and it will be. HS2 risks being strangled by a cut down HS2 Euston.

 

[Class 466]

The Sunak notion when he cancelled HS2a/b was that the money would be spent on other transport priorities which would be delivered quicker - "Network North".
This included action on bus fares, potholes and a rigmarole of minor local transport improvements countrywide.
Some of those projects have already started - ie the money is already being spent.

Before the new DfT pronounces on HS2a/b, it will have to review "Network North" and decide how to deal with the promises made for that programme.
I think Louise Haigh and Rachel Reeves will take their time to decide if and how to progress HS2, while at the same time not doing anything stupid such as selling off land earmarked under the existing legislation.
I'd have thought the Autumn Statement is where we might find some initial answers, but the big numbers will have to wait till the next spending review.
The King's Speech at the opening of the next parliament might also give some clues.

HS2 Phase 2a was supposed to be costed better than phase1, because it is mostly on the surface with more measurable contractor costs, and no stations.
The aim was for some of the contracts to be across both phase 1 and 2a (eg the railway construction), with economies of scale.
That isn't now happening, thanks to Sunak - and Phase 1's railway contracts still haven't been let.
There's bound to be a big investigation of HS2 costs, before any major new contracts are let.

Most of those 'Network North' ideas were purely just ideas thought up the day before and weren't grounded in reality at all.

 

[Class 170101]

2a makes a lot of sense, but we more urgently need an answer on the Euston terminus.

Given the damage to the Euston area I wonder how supportive Kier Starmer would be of HS2?

 

[Mikey C]

Given the damage to the Euston area I wonder how supportive Kier Starmer would be of HS2?

He's been quite anti-HS2 at Euston in the past.

 

[takno]

He's been quite anti-HS2 at Euston in the past.

As the local MP he can hardly go around being 100% pro knocking down a huge chunk of the constituency. Now that the demolition is complete, most of that logic has gone. Cancelling Euston altogether would be a brave (stupid) decision, so the tunnelling is also happening pretty much whatever happens.

Given that, it seems like there's no reason for the local MP to prefer an extra block of yuppie flats over a decent number of platforms.

 

[HSTEd]

As the local MP he can hardly go around being 100% pro knocking down a huge chunk of the constituency. Now that the demolition is complete, most of that logic has gone. Cancelling Euston altogether would be a brave (stupid) decision, so the tunnelling is also happening pretty much whatever happens.

Given that, it seems like there's no reason for the local MP to prefer an extra block of yuppie flats over a decent number of platforms.

We don't appear to have a truly workable plan for the reconstruction of Euston however, which is how the project got kicked into the long grass in the first place.

Both attempts to design such a station have failed and it will be years until a plan can be drawn up and even longer to start construction.

That is assuming that the third attempt produces a more suitable design than the last two.

Personally I think Euston basically has to be taken back to an open air station and then be started again. Such a project would have to be largely completed before any HS2 platforms could be built, assuming we want to solve the long term problems at Euston.

 

[MarkyT]

He's been quite anti-HS2 at Euston in the past.

Being anti-HS2 over Euston is a bit pointless now. All the property acquisition and demolition around there has been carried out. Clearly there'll be further disturbance to remaining residents during construction. Some of the local opposition probably arose from valuations of flats in former council blocks that were demolished. I expect some found their financial compensation was insufficient to cover a new property anywhere nearby, effectively forcing them out of London. That needn't have been the case if the project had recreated sufficient affordable properties for those displaced nearby. Of course some of those flats were probably air b&bs and similar, not providing vital affordable housing for low-paid key workers the city depends on to function.

As the local MP he can hardly go around being 100% pro knocking down a huge chunk of the constituency. Now that the demolition is complete, most of that logic has gone. Cancelling Euston altogether would be a brave (stupid) decision, so the tunnelling is also happening pretty much whatever happens.

Given that, it seems like there's no reason for the local MP to prefer an extra block of yuppie flats over a decent number of platforms.

Any new development over or instead of rail platforms is likely to be very expensive property not for the likes of the former residents in the blocks that were demolished for throat widening.

 

[Bradford1]

I believe they should restart HS2 Phase 2a but rebrand it as something else. The term HS2 has developed strong negative connotations amongst voters, when they hear the term HS2, they think, waste of money

 

[JonathanH]

I believe they should restart HS2 Phase 2a but rebrand it as something else. The term HS2 has developed strong negative connotations amongst voters, when they hear the term HS2, they think, waste of money

Very much so, but however it is branded, it will be unpopular with those people who don't see the point in large scale infrastructure developments.

 

[Bradford1]

They could announce a new rail line between Birmingham and Manchester via Crewe to increase capacity and patriotically name it the Churchill Line

 

[Snow1964]

As part of his commentary during the Thurs/Fri overnight Sky News election special, (maybe about 4am!), Mayor of Gtr Manchester, Andy Burnham was adamant that HS2 needed to be continued north of Birmingham because the WCML just did not have the capacity to cope. So no doubt the lobbying will begin in earnest.

Andy Burnham was on Laura Kuenssberg show on BBC1 this morning, and said he is meeting Labour leadership later this week and will be pushing for starting rail line construction, particularly the Northern Powerhouse Liverpool-Manchester line

However the Business Secretary (on same show) reminded everyone that Ministers have been asked not to discuss commitments ahead of Kings Speech at Opening of Parliament.

State opening of Parliament is Wednesday 17th July.

 

[Nottingham59]

They could announce a new rail line between Birmingham and Manchester via Crewe to increase capacity and patriotically name it the Churchill Line

Or the Empire Line, after the Empire Windrush

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Andy Burnham was on Laura Kuenssberg show on BBC1 this morning, and said he is meeting Labour leadership later this week and will be pushing for starting rail line construction, particularly the Northern Powerhouse Liverpool-Manchester line

However the Business Secretary (on same show) reminded everyone that Ministers have been asked not to discuss commitments ahead of Kings Speech at Opening of Parliament.

State opening of Parliament is Wednesday 17th July.

Any construction on NPR isn’t going to begin until the 2030’s, there is still a huge amount of design work which the new government can continue and a hybrid bill to get through Parliament.

 

[HSTEd]

I believe they should restart HS2 Phase 2a but rebrand it as something else. The term HS2 has developed strong negative connotations amongst voters, when they hear the term HS2, they think, waste of money

The BCR for HS2 Phase 2a is unlikely to get it through the funding system if it was to start again from scratch. It would take substantial political capital driving the project forward at this stage.

I also don't think the negative connotations amongst politicians and voters will be eliminated by simply changing the name.
It would pretty obviously remain the same scheme.

 

[Topological]

Mildly off-topic, but one of the biggest challenges of late has been the ignorance of the Westminster government to the situation in the north. The geography of left-behindedness has brought about some quite worrying political trends and, of course, the 2019 Red Wall collapse. Labour have gone well beyond regaining their ground, but Reform are still sitting there to pounce on any discontent.

There are some quite strong arguments for Labour to show that they can bring HS2 north and stop it becoming just another example of a gain for the South. The Liverpool to Manchester line is a big part of securing the impact in the North. I suspect Labour are looking at this with a view to not losing the areas again.

Successive governments have been very good at directing investment south. With mayors in all the cities and the big majority in the commons, it is a good chance for Labour to show commitment further north.

Far from worrying about the vote potential of HS2, Labour should instead look at the transformational impact and ensure that impact benefits as many of the Labour areas to the North.

 

[Mikey C]

Mildly off-topic, but one of the biggest challenges of late has been the ignorance of the Westminster government to the situation in the north. The geography of left-behindedness has brought about some quite worrying political trends and, of course, the 2019 Red Wall collapse. Labour have gone well beyond regaining their ground, but Reform are still sitting there to pounce on any discontent.

There are some quite strong arguments for Labour to show that they can bring HS2 north and stop it becoming just another example of a gain for the South. The Liverpool to Manchester line is a big part of securing the impact in the North. I suspect Labour are looking at this with a view to not losing the areas again.

Successive governments have been very good at directing investment south. With mayors in all the cities and the big majority in the commons, it is a good chance for Labour to show commitment further north.

Far from worrying about the vote potential of HS2, Labour should instead look at the transformational impact and ensure that impact benefits as many of the Labour areas to the North.

The issue though is that high speed lines from Manchester to Liverpool, and Birmingham to Manchester won't actually help much of "The North".

Indeed I imagine there will be people in smaller northern towns who see Manchester as being as privileged as London!

 

[HSTEd]

Far from worrying about the vote potential of HS2, Labour should instead look at the transformational impact and ensure that impact benefits as many of the Labour areas to the North.

If you were going to design a scheme to impact as much of the North of England as possible with "transformational impact", I'm not sure it would look much like HS2.
Much less the cut down sections that we might actually get built any time soon.

 

[JonathanH]

Far from worrying about the vote potential of HS2, Labour should instead look at the transformational impact and ensure that impact benefits as many of the Labour areas to the North.

Convincing anyone that HS2 (or even a better railway from Liverpool to Manchester) is the catalyst for a better life for many on the North is going to be a big challenge. The impact is too far away in the future.