Transport Select Committee on HS2

The Transport Select Committee issued its report on High Speed Rail on 8 November 2011 with this announcement and recommendations. We've read the full report and this is our summary of the key points:

Although the Transport Select Committee (TSC) supports a high speed rail network and believes HS2 could be part of it, they have about as many misgivings as we do.  And when followed through these misgivings are fatal to the case for HS2. When you get past the headlines of their report, the Select Committee has almost as many misgivings about HS2 as we do.

They find a host of problems with the economic case, its environmental impact, treatment of alternatives, technical issues, even problems with consultation itself – all which adds up to a scheme that needs to go back to the drawing board.

The TSC

• Calls for a revised business case using a lower value of time, as what has been used is not a sound basis for justifying HS2 (para 69) – and say the revised basis should also apply in assessing the alternatives to a new railway
   
• Questions the case for very high speed: by excessively valuing speed the decision to go for 250mph ‘prematurely ruled out other route options’ that follow existing transport corridors (para 68)
   
• Observes that the alternatives have not been properly examined
   
• Doesn’t believe the case has been made that aviation will reduce (para 76) – even with the full Y. And not surprisingly they also say that the claims of substantial carbon reduction benefits ‘don’t stand scrutiny’ (para 77).
   
• Advises Government to place greater emphasis on following existing transport corridors – to reduce its local environmental impact and effect on the Chilterns AONB (para 83). The revised business case should place a value on natural capital
   
• Considers the case for the best way of serving Heathrow needs clarifying (para 104)
   
• Say insufficient attention has been given to the economic case for the London terminus arrangements
   
• Is dissatisfied that basic information on the Y network was not provided for the public consultation, nor a proper assessment of the impact on rebalancing the economy, given the reliance placed on these (para 63).  TSC recommend no decision is taken on Phase 1 until such Phase 2 information is produced, appraised and consulted on (para 87)
   
• Agree that 18 trains per hour at 225mph is a risk factor, ‘not attempted elsewhere’, – despite government claims, and calls on them to publish the full details (para 116)
   
• Recommend that Government expressly show that investment in classic rail will not suffer as a result of HS2 (conclusion para 4) – hard to see Government achieving this given Villiers’ recent statement about the Northern Hub not being affordable!
   

Finally, they confirm our figurework on the arithmetic of what capacity the alternatives produce (Annex 2).  And they concede it ‘might meet the background passenger growth forecast to 2043 at peak times’ (para 39).

But they then move the goal posts and appeal to the recent unprecedented period of rail growth continuing indefinitely into the future. But this ignores DfT’s own forecast and is highly implausible given other trends in domestic travel.

You can read our press release (8 Nov 2011) about the report here.

_________________________________________________

The history of the TSC's inquiry into HS2 is as follows:

This Inquiry was announced in early 2011 with all the initial evidence to be submitted by May.  Hearings were in June, July and September and the report is expected later in 2011.  There was a wide ranging remit that focused on specific questions.

In June, Oxera, who were appointed by the TSC as independent analysts, published their review of the business case.  This was essentially to assist the TSC identify key questions on the business case. It concluded however the benefits were uncertain and raised many of the same issues HS2AA cover eg value of time, sensitivity tests.

Initial evidence
HS2AA’s 16 May submission has been accepted by the Transport Select Committee for their inquiry into HS2. The submission focused on the business case, the questionable assumptions, how alternatives can deliver the required capacity, and issues about the north south divide.

All other Transport Select Committee written submissions can now been seen on the parliamentary website.

Supplementary evidence
HS2AA has submitted further evidence (accepted by the Committee) on:

• WCML capacity – to give the facts on when WCML will be full, and the true extent of overcrowding
• The arithmetic of the alternatives – to demonstrate the additional capacity it provides, and how it meets the doubling in forecast demand
• The 2011 Euro barometer survey – that shows UK rail passenger satisfaction far outstrips that of most of our European neighbours eg coming second in satisfaction (at 92%) with length of journey time ie speed. Far higher than France, Germany and Italy all of whom have majored on high speed rail
• The latest NPS results – to that show journey time length has the highest satisfaction of any factor rated, and therefore hardly a priority
• Updating the Eddington analysis – to show we still have much shorter journey times between our capital and top five cities than in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Germany, despite their focus on HSR
• The financial troubles that other HSR services have been getting
• Issues Oxera had not raised – summarised in a letter to Oxera

This evidence is on the parliamentary website. It was submitted partly to clarify misunderstandings, and partly to provide evidence on passenger priorities for improvements.

Further updates
Immediately prior to the DfT and HS2 Ltd appearances at the TSC (13 Sept), HS2AA did a critique of the written responses by DfT and by HS2 Ltd to the Transport Select Committee (and Oxera) questions. This shows that DfT and HS2 Ltd are unable to fill the holes in their case.  Key points are in the press release (9th Sept 2011) highlighting how the case is now in tatters.  HS2 Ltd and Dft appeared in front of the committee 13 September.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Transport Select Committee (on Economic Growth)

This began on 19 October 2010

HS2AA made two submissions.  Our first submission focused on the DfTs assessment process, using HS2 as an example of weaknesses in the system, and the second submission (26 Nov 2010) on the key flaws in the economic case (both business and transformational).

Bluespace Thinking gave oral evidence on the flaws in DfT guidance for forecasting demand in support of their submission. 

HS2AA wrote to the Chair of the Committee when it learnt that HS2 Ltd alone are being invited to give oral evidence on HS2 in this Inquiry. The Committee agreed to hear the campaigners concerns, and STOP HS2 give oral evidence. 

HS2AA followed up (7 Dec 2010) with further clarifications on the evidence provided, especially on the alternatives and so called transformational benefits.

The report by the Transport Select Committee on Transport and the Economy is now published and can be found here.