A solution looking for a problem HS2 Debate Philip Bates
Our for and against comment on HS2 kicks off by asking if it will actually solve the problem of overcrowding. See page 12 for a different view.
HS2 in the Swallownest region of south Yorkshire
FROM ITS INCEPTION HS2 has raised strong opinions because, for many people, the investment case did not seem plausible. The September 2013 House of Commons Public Accounts Committee Report on HS2, for example, said: “The Department has yet to demonstrate that this is the best way to spend £50 billion on rail investment in these constrained times; that this is the most effective and economic way of responding to future demand patterns, that the fi gures predicting future demand are robust and credible and that the improved connectivity between London and regional cities will enhance growth and activity in the regions rather than drawing more activity into London.” For many, HS2 feels like a solution looking for a problem. To illustrate this, let’s run through the arguments for HS2 since it fi rst piqued my interest in 2008. First, HS2 was going to solve the
London airport capacity problem by diverting people from short-haul planes onto trains. But this passenger fl ow is tiny and solves nothing. It was also going to save a lot of business people a lot of time while travelling. That was a benefi t wasn’t it? Not really, as time on a train can be highly productive. It now seems accepted this benefi t is not as great as fi rst presented.
Regional regeneration Still, even if business travellers aren’t going to benefi t through time savings, everyone knows HS2 will galvanise regional economies, don’t they? The problem is that projects like HS2 are just as likely to suck activity out of a region as generate it. Many believe we can do more for regional development by spending the money in other ways. There was also the argument that
this “Keynesian” investment was the way we got out of recession, but it now appears we’re heading out of the
recession without HS2. Which brings us to the second reason
why we need HS2, the future over- crowding on the rail network. In a spectacular reversal in thinking, it now seems HS2 is not about speed, but about seats. This new argument relies on demand growing as predicted in the HS2 business case. But the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, like this author, isn’t convinced. In addition, one has to ask whether
increasing rail capacity, especially into London, isn’t actually best resolved by a more holistic approach that directly targets the issue, such as building more housing in London and more commuter focused rail schemes, rather than an expensive high-speed line from the south-east to the north. Even if one sets the above points aside, it still leaves the question as to why we are going for “predict and provide” on rail, when we have given this up elsewhere in favour of demand management. Information provided by the National Travel Survey showing the average number surface rail trips in progress by hour and day of week unsurprisingly shows that trains are very busy in the morning and evening rush hours and pretty empty (in comparison) at other times. The overcrowding problem lies with commuters, particularly travelling into
One has to ask whether solving rail capacity, especially into London, isn’t actually best resolved by a more holistic approach that directly targets the issue
London. So, before we invest in HS2 to address this issue, we need to ask ourselves some questions. First, can we do more to manage peak demand? The answer is yes. With smart electronic ticketing we can adopt more sophisticated pricing regimes. For example, we need to address pricing “carrots and sticks” for both morning and evening peaks and both outbound and inbound journeys. We also need to be more innovative in the way we price season tickets, allowing commuters to gain fi nancially by spreading their time of travel. This, in turn, will deliver wider network benefi ts a win win situation. Of course, this needs business to adopt more fl exible working or pay schemes, but in return they could then see the benefi t from HS2’s billions spent elsewhere.
Changing demand profi le Second, will the current demand profi le represent the rest of the 21st century? The answer, in my view, is no. It is a profi le for the 20th century. In an age of “internet face time” and increasing reliance on exporting our ideas and creativity to the growing economies of the southern hemisphere, will most of us be working 9 to 5 in an offi ce in 10 or 20 years? One only has to look at the growth of Sunday as a shopping day to see how quickly what is considered the social norm can change. How long before other sectors also adopt a seven-day week? If the problem really is overcrowding on
the rail network, let’s look at how we solve that problem, not reverse HS2 in as the solution. When thinking about HS2 as a solution for rail network crowding, one can’t help being reminded of the old joke about the man lost in a country lane who asks the local farmer for directions. “Well” says the farmer, “if you want to go there, you don’t really want to start from here.”
Philip Bates is a director at Buro Happold CONSTRUCTION MANAGER | OCTOBER 2013 | 11
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68