HS2 is not a good investment

Published: September 8, 2011

MICHAEL Williams (Fast track to a new prosperity, Forum, September 1) bases his argument in support of HS2 on his experience of commuting from Euston to Preston.

He says the crowded West Coast Main Line trains have standing-room only and HS2 is the solution. Well it may be a solution but won’t be working till 2026 and then with poor rail connectivity and high speed only to Lichfield.

So even if there is extra capacity in 15 years’ time Mr Williams’s overall time to Manchester will be about the same as Virgin’s existing Pendolinos (also classed as high speed trains albeit a bit slower than HS2 trains on HS2 track – but faster than HS2 trains north of Lichfield). From my experience of travelling regularly at peak times up north on West Coast Main Line there is normally no problem with capacity, booking my standard class seats in advance at a discount.

Mr Williams’s long-distance commuting takes a love of railway to its limit. I would hope that such travel patterns are not the cause of HS2’s inflated passenger projections (that underpin its shaky business plan).

Other people’s priority might be to avoid such excessive commuting; relocate and get a bike (or take temporary digs up north).

My perception is that the opposition to HS2 is much broader than Mr Williams’s of councillors appearing “to line up with right-wing think tanks and rich country landowners”.

It is from taxpayers facing the prospect of a £17billion bill just to Birmingham International and the prospect of a 15-year wait for the service. It is also from the poor people whose lives will be blighted.

I believe however most people would support sensible investment in rail infrastructure in the form of cheaper improvements now to provide greater connectivity and resilience.

Pan-Camden HS2 Alliance shares Mr Williams’s enthusiasm for rail transport and awareness of Camden’s railway heritage (not to mention legacy).

But we believe a more incremental solution is needed than that proposed by HS2 so extra capacity is provided much sooner than HS2’s 15-year phase1 programme.

We also consider HS2 frivolous in proposing that £4billion of the £17billion phase1 cost is spent in achieving two or three minutes journey-time reduction on the 7km between Old Oak Common (Willesden) and Euston.

We advocate that if HS2 goes ahead, the main high speed station should be at Old Oak Common as part of a transport hub (though with some peak-time trains continuing to Euston and other termini overground at slower speed through London).

HS2 say the work from Euston to Old Oak Common must be carried out first.

Our proposal will avoid an unthinkable Edinburgh tram-style project cut-back resulting in the finished project being reduced to 7km of high speed track – the fast track to Old Oak Common (to paraphrase David Williams) rather than prosperity.

Rail investment should be future-proof and incremental. We should not be betting our shirts on a long shot – long-distance commuting in the distant future whereby (to misquote Ruskin) “Every fool in Camden can be at Preston in half-an-hour (sic), and every fool in Preston at Camden”.

Let us not misdirect our rail investment to this foolish end at the expense of continuing connectivity and resilience improvements.
Jeff Travers
Pan-Camden HS2 Alliance