HS2 Birmingham-London: Something has gone hideously wrong with HS2 – and it feels personal for Birmingham
The HS2 project between Birmingham and London faces delays and soaring costs, raising concerns about its economic benefits and impact on public services. Dr Steve McCabe shares his thoughts on the issue, which he says feels “personal”.
Watch more of our videos on ShotsTV.com
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
It’s important to stress that I’m a huge fan or railways, says Dr Steve McCabe writing for Birmingham World.
One of my earliest, though somewhat vague, memories is of setting off on holiday with my parents on a train from Birmingham from Snow Hill in the old-style carriages that consisted of subdivided booths accessed by a corridor in which three adults sat directly facing three others.
It felt luxurious.
I can’t recall if it was pulled by a steam locomotive, but it was the time when the changeover to the futuristic cleaner and faster diesel trains was happening.
Any history of trains makes clear that development of railways was a fundamental part of the utterly transformational industrial revolution.
If you’ve not read it, seminal railways commentator Christian Wolmar’s Fire and Steam: How the Railways Transformed Britain published by Atlantic Books, is a mesmerising explanation of how the ability to travel by train revolutionised society and the way commerce operated in Britain.
Those living in one part of the country could travel to destinations which, hitherto, required long and extremely arduous journeys by horse drawn carriage.
Trains liberated citizens though, as is still the case, your experience was governed by the amount you could afford to pay.
One can only imagine how dreadful it was to travel seated on wooden bench in a carriage open to elements, not to mention the soot - a byproduct of burning coal that produced steam to create the immense power to pull the carriages.
However, for travellers on the early trains two centuries ago, such considerations were unimportant.
What counted was being transported at a consistent speed superior to the alternatives that existed.
It’s worth pointing out that for passengers who travelled on the first line to opened on 27th September 1925, the Stockton and Darlington, a mere 25 miles in length, the average speed was 12-15 miles per hour.
Amusingly, as trains became faster, some speculated whether travelling at what were regarded as unnatural rapid speed would damage passengers’ health.
Unsurprisingly, investors seeing the opportunities trains offered to transport passengers and goods over longer distances at increasingly higher speeds, piled in to what seemed like a sure-fire opportunity to make money.
The two decades following 1825 resulted in a frenzy of construction, referred to as ‘Railway Mania’, during which in excess of 6,000 miles of lines were built.
My favourite anecdote is that for those in landlocked parts of the country, such as here in Birmingham, trains allowed them to taste fish caught in the sea which would previously have rotted in the time taken in transit.
Railways, it seems, is the reason we enjoy a proper (cod) fish and chip supper here in Birmingham!
Rapidity of construction was as crucial as decreasing the journey times by train.
However, as any builder will stress, until you actually start digging, it’s impossible to be absolutely certain of ground conditions.
For this reason, digging and laying down of rail line by what were known as ‘navvies’, a shortening of inland navigators – a nod to the job title of those who’d built the canals – all-too-frequently meant construction times and costs increased meaning investors lost their money.
A consequence was to effectively halt railway construction in the latter part of the 1840s and into the early part of the 1850s.
Experience showed that building railways is an inherently risky business.
Nevertheless, railways continued to be built and, significantly, peaked just before the first world war at 23,440 miles when, prior to widespread ownership of cars by the majority of citizens, railways were standardly used as the mode of transport, particularly for holidays like I recall.
Currently, there are 9,848 miles of rail line in this country of which 39% (3,810 miles) are electrified.
However, within these totals there are the 68 miles what’s known as high-speed railway; the HS1 line between London’s St Pancras and the Channel Tunnel.
Operated by Southeastern and opened to international services in two sections in 2003 and 2007, HS1 allows trains to run at up to 185 mph, roughly the speed formula one cars travel at.
Costing a total of £8.64 billion, just slightly over £100 million per mile, HS1 was completed on time and under budget and delivers an estimated economic benefit well in excess of £430 million per annum meaning it’s probably reached the point of paying for itself.
Which brings us to what seems like the never-ending saga of the next stretch of high-speed line currently under construction, the 140 mile track between London and Curzon Street here in Birmingham.
Curzon Street Sation, jointly constructed and operated by the London and Birmingham Railway (L&BR) and the Grand Junction Railway (GJR), and opened in June 1938, was, until what became known as Birmingham New Street in 1854 (built as a bigger station), the only rail link between the two cities.
Though passenger traffic switched to London and North Western Railway, goods continued to be transported via Curzon Street until 1966 when all platforms as well as the original sheds were demolished.
However, the entrance building, built at a cost of £28,000, and designed by Philip Hardwick with the purpose of being the offices and boardroom for the original operators, survives and, as a Grade One listed building, will be incorporated into the terminus for HS2.
When HS2 was announced, Curzon Street, with its long-standing pedigree, would make an explicit connection between early railways and what was touted as a vital part of the future for this mode of travel.
Then Labour Secretary of Transport, Lord Adonis claimed in March 2010, that HS2 would ensure a fast link from cities in the Midlands, Northwest, Yorkshire and Scotland to Europe’s impressively extensive network of high-speed railways.
As Lord Adonis explained, this would add a total of 335 miles of high-speed track on which electric trains would reach a maximum speed of 225mph.
In what must rank as world beating optimism, Adonis claimed the whole scheme would come in with a price tag of £30 billion.
Additionally, he stated, it was anticipated trains would be running between London and Birmingham in 2026.
Fifteen years on, the reality is somewhat different.
Adonis’ intended scheme has been pared down to one link between Curzon Street and London and will not complete until, HS2’s website states, between 2029 and 2033.
Some speculate that even seeing trains by 2033 may be optimistic.
There’s no certainty of HS2 will terminate in London Euston, the original destination, as costs of tunnelling to get from old Oak Common, where it will definitely stop through to link to the Elizabeth Line underground line, is likely to be prohibitively expensive.
Getting to Euston was seen as vital as this is a central London station and essential to a reduced journey time from Birmingham of 49 minutes.
Significantly, as investors engaged in ‘railway mania’ of the nineteenth century discovered to their cost, estimated budgets can prove to be wildly inaccurate.
A Department for Transport document leaked to the Financial Times last December suggested the cost of tunnelling and a new constructed station at Euston could be £10 billion.
Latest estimates are that completing HS2 could be £80 billion which includes construction a new station at Euston to replace the current monstrosity built in the 1960s and which swept away the original architectural gem completed in 1837.
However, critics of HS2 should not be surprised if the eventual bill for linking London and Birmingham Curzon Street with 140 miles of high-speed line (including the two stations) exceeds £100 billion.
Two years ago, Michael Byng, a chartered quantity surveyor who creating the method used by Network Rail to cost projects, estimated the line between Birmingham and London was going to cost almost £100 billion (£99.4 billion).
For those who like to see this in numerical form, that’s £100,000,000,000.
Needless to say, those who claimed HS2 would be vastly expensive and deliver little benefit apart from slightly faster travelling time between the two cities, believe that this is an appalling waste of money.
Something certainly seems to have gone hideously wrong in HS2.
Comparisons with building high speed lines in Europe and other parts of the world demonstrate that HS2 is many times more expensive per mile.
Granted there’s been the need to extensively tunnel through the Chilterns which, to appease local residents, has considerably added to the cost.
However, there’s more to this issue than just the cost of tunnels and horrendously expensive bat sheds as well as all of the stories regularly appearing of profligate cost control on Britain’s largest infrastructure project.
Worryingly, whatever putative economic benefit HS2 was likely to deliver has vanished.
What will HS2 between London and Birmingham achieve for the country in terms of social inclusiveness and opportunity for unemployed young people?
Will HS2 demonstrably make ‘levelling up’ more likely to occur?
From a personal perspective I cannot think of anyone I know who believed we needed a faster line between Birmingham and London.
More reliability and cheaper fares is their preference.
Critically, what everyone I speak to emphasises the importance of better public transport locally.
Ask anyone who travels on the main arterial routes into and out of Birmingham during rush hour what they would like to see.
More efficient buses and trams on all routes in and out of the city is a no-brainer.
Back in 2010 homeworking and quality of life were less important than they are now.
Clearly, the ‘sunk cost’ notion – that so much has been spent much already you might as well continue – is used as an excuse to carry on.
Perhaps, in another fifty years, when the costs of HS2 have long been forgotten, there’ll be an argument that the phenomenal investment of public money on this line was foresightful and wise, similar to grand schemes such as sewage, water and, of course, the London Underground when they were originally conceived.
However, the here and now is the focus of all citizens who, we’re being told, will potentially need to pay more to fill the ‘black hole’ before we see any discernible improvement in public services.
Some would assert that it would be better to stop digging on HS2 and divert desperately needed money into, for example, the NHS which is in crisis or building houses for those who are in urgent need of decent accommodation.
I think it will be a very long time before any government considers building any more high-speed lines in this country.
Given the recent experience of HS2, that’s logical.
Dr Steve McCabe
Steve is Professor and Pro Vice Chancellor, DoctorateHub.
Previously, having worked for Birmingham City Council, he spent the last 35 years as an academic at Birmingham City University teaching and researching economics, management and business. Additionally, he has written extensively for edited texts examining economics and politics.
He regularly writes and comments regularly in the national and international media on politics and the economy and has published texts on quality management, benchmarking, ‘Brexit’ and its economic and social impact, the green economy and manufacturing, house prices and India’s progress since independence.
