IN a robust response to criticisms by the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, the Government has said the case for HS2 is clear – and that the best upgrade alternative would only provide one more peak hour train compared to the current timetable.
In its 30-page response to the report published by the Lords’ committee in March, the Government declares: “HS2 delivers the step change in capacity and connectivity we need to support future growth and help rebalance the economy,” adding: “It is a vital part of the Government’s long-term economic plan, strongly supported by the Northern and Midlands cities.”
The Government also rejected any suggestions that people should be priced off the railway, and for charging “premium fares” for HS2 journeys: “Over 90 million passengers are expected to use HS2 each year once the full Y network is complete – not just a few business people.”
It said the West Coast Main line is now the busiest mixed-use rail line in Europe. “Despite a £9 billion renewal and upgrade completed in 2008, the line is effectively full in terms of train paths, which restricts what services we can run and is impacting performance on both commuter and intercity services”
The economic case for HS2 was “clear and robust”, with a benefit/cost ratio including wider economic impacts of 2.3, which was higher than for either the Jubilee Line Extension or the current Thameslink projects when approved.
The Government said HS2 “will create nearly 25,000 construction jobs and support up to 100,000 jobs around the stations. The Core Cites group suggest this figure could be as much as 400,000 jobs.”
It was clear that “we need to invest in our railways. In particular, we need to address a significant capacity challenge on the West Coast Main Line.”
The Government said: “For intercity services, even more so than commuter services, the issue is about both the number of train paths and the number of seats on trains. With the line full in terms of train paths, operators cannot run all the services they would like, which restricts the markets they can serve.
“Some sizeable towns in the North and Scotland such as Bolton, Blackburn and Dumfries do not have direct services to London, while other towns such as Telford and Blackpool have infrequent services. Considering its size, Liverpool is not as well connected as other cities.”
The Government added: “Without action, seating capacity will be a real issue – even if passenger growth rates turn out to be lower than we have seen over the last 20 years.”
And it warned that without HS2 one in four passengers using peak period commuter trains would be standing to and from London Euston within the next 20 years.
Responding to suggested HS2 alternatives, the Government said: “We have also analysed potential crowding levels if all intercity services are extended to the maximum 11 cars together with a first class coach converted to standard. This would provide 33 per cent more seats across the evening peak, yet with growth of 3.6 per cent per year, by 2033/34 one in ten passengers on those services would be standing. Nearly half of those would be standing for over an hour before the first station stop out of London – in some cases as far as Crewe or Warrington.”
‘Three passengers for every two seats’
“Crowding would be worse on Friday afternoons, when nearly one in five peak time passengers would have to stand, even with the additional capacity. During the busiest hour, demand would see three passengers wanting to travel for every two seats.
“Flexible pricing would not be able to address the problem as trains would be full across a sustained period of time – unless people were priced off the railway completely, which the Government does not consider to be an acceptable solution.”
On capacity, the Government said: “HS2 not only slashes journey times, it provides a very significant increase in intercity and commuting capacity on the rail network,” adding that “HS2 will also free up space on the existing rail network for more commuter and inter-regional services and long distance services for key towns and cities not served by HS2.
“Currently, capacity constraints limit what services can be provided along the length of the [West Coast] line as trade-offs are made between intercity and regional or commuter trains. The benefits from capacity released by HS2 will not be restricted to London commuter services, but will be felt by passengers across the country.”
The Government added that Network Rail’s forecasts suggest demand for freight services could nearly double by 2033, from 42 to 80 trains per day. “HS2 could also free up 20 freight paths per day on the West Coast Main Line, potentially more with detailed planning.”
As for further upgrades, the Government said there would only be limited returns. “Only HS2 will provide the step change in capacity we need to address the capacity challenges facing commuter, intercity and freight services as well as major improvements in connectivity between major city regions. …. The best upgrade alternative to HS2 would only provide one more peak hour train path compared to the current timetable.”
Opponents of the scheme have remained unimpressed.
Penny Gaines, who chairs the pressure group Stop HS2, said: “The Government’s response to the Lords Economics Committee shows how disjointed then Department for Transport is. They haven’t even attempted to answer many of the questions asked by the Lords, and the answers they have given have been demolished long ago.”
“What’s worse is this report completely ignores the announcements last week about the pausing and review of Network Rail improvement projects. The Lords asked whether improving regional rail links in the north should be prioritised ahead of building HS2. In this document, the Department of Transport claim they can do both, referring to the Northern Transport Strategy, electrification projects and the Trans-Pennine links, even though last week, the Trans-Peninne electrification project was paused and almost all other rail projects are under review. They’ve shown they haven’t the money to do both.”