Share
Sam Shead
Reporter
The rail thing
According to Gil Howarth, project director of the Channel Tunnel rail link (CTRL) or HS1 as it has come to be known, all big rail projects need to be championed by a prominent figure in Westminster, City Hall, or both.
Howarth told The Engineer that a political champion in his mind is responsible for, ‘gaining cross-party support and backing from the Treasury, while publicly promoting the scheme and helping to secure support from all stakeholders.
‘The person who got the Jubilee Line extension built was Steve Norris when he was minister for transport and minister for London,’ said Howarth. ‘If you look at Crossrail then that’s been Boris Johnson, and Ken Livingstone before that. HS1 was originally Michael Heseltine and then taken over by John Prescott.’
‘There isn’t a champion for HS2,’ claimed Howarth at the HS2 press briefing London this week.
Meanwhile, Lord Adonis, secretary of state for transport from 2009-2010, told The Engineer that he believes both the current transport secretary, Justine Greening, and David Cameron are acting as HS2 champions.
However, he also claimed: ‘They need to get a move on in introducing the legislation for HS2. It is not scheduled to be introduced into Parliament until the end of 2013, which is nearly four years after I published the plan for HS2.’
But the prime minister and his transport secretary aren’t the only two dilly-dallying on HS2.
Elsewhere, Boris Johnson, the current mayor of London and the favourite to remain in power at City Hall, revealed to Camden voters that he is yet to be convinced by HS2; a statement likely to appease the residents who will be inconvenienced to one degree or another over the course of a decade due to Euston Station’s whole-scale demolition.
So why the hesitation and reluctancy to commit? Part of the reason HS2 is without a key backer at this stage is likely to be because it’s still early days. Even though a plan has been put forward and approved, no one wants to be seen ‘championing’ HS2 as there are still many concerns relating to the route, the trains, the cost, the integration with other lines, and the time frame it will all be completed in.
‘That’s why we need to get the debate properly matured because the worst possible outcome is that this could become political football in the next general election,’ said Jeremy Acklam, member of the Transport Policy Panel at the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET).
‘We need to have a key supporter on side from each party by the time we get towards our next election,’ he stressed.
The IET is getting the debate started at the National Railway Museum in York on 7th June where the discussion will focus on what aspects of the proposals for HS2 could be changed so that the benefits of the population north of Birmingham can be significantly improved.
Projects of this magnitude are key to UK growth but without a committed champion they can also be susceptible to setbacks and delays. With the backing of the engineering sector and arguably more importantly, the British public, I’m optimistic a champion or two could emerge from under the covers in the near future.
An interview with the technical director of HS2, Prof Andrew McNaughton, will appear in the 28th May issue of The Engineer.
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Readers' comments (32)
Anonymous | 6 May 2012 8:30 am
Excellent ! This is such good news.
Now we want a new design brief
A. Give the country value
B. We know what other countries are paying so no excuses.
C. Provide the service that we really want.
D. Get out of your design straight jacket and breath some life into this!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Paul Walter | 6 May 2012 9:31 am
Who wants to put their name to this project when there are so many unanswered questions about the economics and viability of HS2. This political vanity project must be dropped.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robert | 7 May 2012 4:42 pm
It is very revealing to see the universal opposition to this project even on a website like this where you may expect to find engineers champing at the bit to show off their technical prowess on such a major showcase project.
There are none so blind as those who will not see, and those promoting HS2 are deliberately ignoring public opinion, inconvenient facts and a grossly overstated business case which anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see has been biased from the start. Our (the taxpayers') £33bn (or more probably £90bn) could be spent in much better ways on the railway network. How about reversing the order of things - upgrade the existing network (longer platforms, upgraded track, rolling stock and signalling to increase train speeds and frequency etc.) then see in 2050 if we still need HS2, whether the 15 or 20 minutes saving in journey time still justifies the spend, and properly analyse how many people will use the service at the extortionate fares it will have to charge to be viable. The M6 Toll should make a good case study for a start!
Britain is a lot smaller than Japan or France, and the impact on travel times is a lot less. Ditch this white elephant now!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Martin Bennett | 7 May 2012 4:59 pm
In their own words. HS2 is not an answer to over-crowding because high speed means fewer trains can travel and with fewer people onboard. CO2 is poor as this airspeed is not dissimilar to an aircraft flying at altitude, and it requires 3 times more concrete than they are admitting to. Do the junior school maths ie length of tunnel, diameter, lining thickness etc. High speed will be too expensive for users, witness the dutch HS rail bankruptcy. In 20 years, video conferencing will have replaced business travel, so who will use it??
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8 May 2012 11:37 am
There is, and has been, a need to improve infrastucture between the North and London for decades, but this? The country needs an upgrade to the "pinched" M6 between Birmingham and Manchester not HS2. Remember freight will not be carried on HS2 and for those who believe you can't build enough road capacity, have a look a the M74 to Glasgow, upgraded for many years now and still running just fine. This can be part of a solution for non-urban infrastruture
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Geoff Hill | 8 May 2012 2:19 pm
We used to have a ready-made path for HS2. It was called the Great Central Route, from Marylebone to the East Midlands. Built to Berne loading gauge and laid out for fast running. Until that nice Dr Beeching came along, and against all the best advice at the time . Everything goes around in circles, eventually?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
T.Taylor | 9 May 2012 1:48 pm
Just like the other carbunckle - the M6 Toll road - whatever happens with HS2, very few will be able to afford it and additional work to existing lines will still have to go ahead to relieve passenger saturation.
Just like the M6 needed widening after the M6 Toll had been completed.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
K Jones | 10 May 2012 1:19 pm
For HS2 read H2S, treat it as you would any toxic material.
It appears to me that the idea was born in London, is driven by people in London, some of whom are just on another Westminster ego trip. It’s the rest of us, not in London, that will be suffering the all the consequences of such a folly as it sucks all the cash out of more worthwhile projects. If those in London are so desperate to build a railway why not just use one lane of the M25 to do it. The whole of Westminster could then be placed upon it driven round and round until sense was rediscovered.
Forget about HS2 (H2S) spend the cash on improving what we have on the west and east coast.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10 May 2012 2:17 pm
What I have found interesting of all the comments, is the fact that there are a good number of those who are really thinking out of the box. I noted only one in favour but there is nothing in their comment of why they favour HS2
The real question to be asked should be about the need to travel to London, there are infinitely far better ways to work than getting on a train. All it takes is a few changes in the way we work and adapt
The answer to what we all really want is better communication, just imagine what we could really do with their proposed budget.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Robert Steele (Midlander in engineering). | 10 May 2012 2:42 pm
Almost universal condemnation of this profligate madness (bar one?) surely reflects the publics view on this. This overwhelming negativity comes from all branches of society; rich, poor, technical or highly educated and all others. Their views are more than amply supported by any fiscal, technical, social or economic study that is conducted using truth and hard facts rather than political wishfull thinking. Regarding existing rail; replacing signaling and traffic control with the latest technology and removing bottlenecks could potentialy double capacity. Check with the best rail engineers! Dump HS2.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment