Written evidence from Tony Bolden and
Reg Harman (HSR 26)
INTRODUCTION
1. We are independent consultants and commentators
on transport matters. We have a particular interest in modern
railway strategy and practice and in how railways should be developed
to play an effective role in the wider economic, environmental
and social context. We have written a number of joint articles
and papers on this topic, including two items on high speed rail
in the recent past (see references). The views set out in this
submission reflect in good part the thoughts developed in these
papers.
2. We have tried to structure our submission
to address the questions the Committee has set out. These are
wide ranging, reflecting the large, complex and sometimes controversial
topic that high speed rail forms. We have sought to respond briefly
while seeking to be clear and cohesive. We hope that the resulting
submission proves useful to the Committee.
THE NEED
FOR HIGH
SPEED RAIL
IN GREAT
BRITAIN
3. We strongly support the concept of one or
more high speed rail lines between London and the major city centres
of the midlands and north of England and of Scotland. Great Britain's
economic development has suffered gravely over decades from excessive
pressure on land use and transport in the South East while resources
are poorly used in the north of the country. Addressing this imbalance
requires effective transport links between the two ends of the
country. Overall the current links are liable to congestion and
delay and do not provide the fast mass connections necessary as
part of a national strategy to redress the north-south divide.
4. A major element in this overall problem is
the shortage of capacity against demand on the main north-south
railway lines. The HS2 consultation document forecasts demand
rising steadily, resulting in serious problems with capacity within
a decade. This complements the Network Rail consultative RUS for
the West Coast Main Line (Network Rail, 2010), which shows that
line capacity is already fully used up between London and Wolverton
and that load factors well in excess of seating capacity are already
found on many intercity and London regional trains. Current forecasts
indicate that this will become much more severe in future years.
Similar pressures on capacity exist for the East Coast Main Line,
and for other radial routes too.
5. The HS2 consultation rightly identifies the
scale of the problems but it does not do justice to their currency
or nature. Because the use of line capacity is already at a premium,
this puts constraints on provision of additional services. Yet
extra services are vital to the present and future economies of
our cities. As an example, London is currently the "powerhouse"
of the national economy through the provision of international
commercial and financial services. These rely on a skilled workforce,
of whom many live well beyond the bounds of greater London, and
on good links to other major commercial cities. Yet it is now
very difficult to create any further capacity for more commuter
or inter-city trains. In addition the high occupancy rates of
current train paths means that quite minor disturbances can seriously
reduce reliability of travel.
RELATIONSHIP OF
HIGH SPEED
RAIL TO
TRANSPORT POLICY
OBJECTIVES
6. The UK Government does not appear to have
a coherent forward looking transport strategy in the way that
most European countries do. Inevitably, since the current Government
took office, it has concentrated attention on restoring the UK's
financial health, but for the medium to long term this approach
should embrace proper investment in infrastructure and services
needed for long term economic stability and growth. We believe
that revitalising the economy, while meeting serious environmental
and social challenges, requires an effective transport strategy,
in which use of the railway network must be play a key role. Development
of a high speed rail network should be a crucial component in
this, as it provides a high level of connectivity and accessibility
that various parts of Great Britain need to have in the 21st Century.
Investment in high speed rail should be complemented by further
improvements to the "classic" rail network, such as
further electrification projects, station and rolling stock improvements,
if the railway network is to remain attractive.
7. The construction of a high speed rail network
will have direct implications for domestic aviation. There is
strong evidence from mainland Europe that high speed train services
have changed the passenger market share considerably towards rail
usage in the corridors they serve. A rail market share of c.70%
is not uncommon; we would expect the same change to occur in the
UK. It also provides an opportunity to link long haul international
air services and domestic rail services more closely through strategically
placed airports.
THE BUSINESS
CASE
Benefits of a new route
8. Previous upgrading of the West Coast Main
Line has now been largely achieved, but only at a high cost in
disruption to all services, and also to the urban areas and their
residents along the line. Yet it has not brought a real long term
solution. Further improving the existing network is likely to
bring further disruption whilst only offering small gains in capacity
and in journey times.
9. Therefore we see the real answer as the provision
of substantial new capacity through a new line on a separate alignment.
There would inevitably be some controversy over any such project;
but building a new route would not disrupt existing lines nor
cause further problems for the many urban areas through which
these pass. By designing and using it strictly for high speed
travel, it could convey a significant number of trains per hour,
leaving the existing network to offer much greater capacity for
other services. In parallel the new line would be able to provide
significant reductions in journey time.
Economic aspects of route choice
10. Any new route must, of necessity, focus on
connecting city centre to city centre, and the routeing will be
largely determined by topography and cost issues. But the opportunities
for serving other main centres, without detracting from the operating
times of nonstop trains, would enable the benefits of faster rail
travel and better connections at regional level to be created,
complementing the better regional services possible on the existing
network. In this way, the new line would provide stronger support
for urban development throughout the corridor served by it, bringing
gains in economic, environmental and social terms. In short, it
needs to be developed as part of a strategy for the network in
its wider context rather than in any degree of isolation.
11. The HS2 approach is heavily founded on measuring
economic gains in conventional cost benefit terms. This form of
assessment does not fully reflect the wider impacts which we consider
are vital to the case, particularly those of spatial planning
and its implications for access, connectivity and economic activity
patterns. The weaknesses in the current cost benefit approaches
have been criticised by the Omega Centre (Omega Centre, 2010).
The Centre's report on risk factors in project appraisal recommends
a multi criteria analysis (MCA) framework; this is much closer
in practice to the approach of other European countries such as
France.
12. Furthermore, the HS2 proposal focuses almost
exclusively on travel between the two city termini and thus assumes
construction of the whole line before it can come into effective
use. If parts of the line were to be built ahead of others, this
would bring benefits in transport and economic terms earlier,
provide a quicker gain from investment, and allow progress in
line with available finances and changing priorities. Such an
approach has been a feature of much of the high speed line development
on the European Continent.
13. The HS2 proposal assumes that construction
of the line and its termini will attract job creating development,
primarily around the termini of the line. This seems very unlikely
in itself. For example, on the existing HS1 line, the new stations
at Stratford International and Ebbsfleet have not brought any
real economic development as yet. In mainland Europe, however,
most cities connected to European high speed lines have benefitted
considerably from this, but only through implementing strong and
consistent strategies for urban development and public transport
in association (Harman, 2006).
14. We agree that the maximum speed of 400 km/hr
(250 mph) should be aimed at, as top operating speeds continue
to rise across mainland Europe and Japan. However, the Birmingham
line at least will be relatively short, built through complex
urban patterns and varied topography, and thus the top speed for
any one section needs to be balanced against disruption of existing
structures and settlements, topography and cost. End to end journey
time and connectivity should form the principal determinants for
design of the line rather than a rigid adherence to a high maximum
speed.
THE STRATEGIC
ROUTE
Route alignment
15. We consider that the proposed HS2 alignment
through the Chilterns would be economically weak, as well as creating
very serious environmental problems. We suggest instead that the
route should be taken northwards out of the London terminal on
the Midland main line, routeing it to Birmingham via Milton Keynes
along the M1 and M6 corridors. This would support development
opportunities and growth along the corridor with new transport
infrastructure, especially the major development in the Milton
Keynes sub region. The new line could also be linked clearly with
the existing rail network in London, at Toddington (north of Luton),
Milton Keynes and Birmingham. This could enable provision of services
from Northampton through Milton Keynes to London, with through
working to Stratford, Thames Gateway and Ashford by linking up
the existing Kent to London fast services on HS1; this would connect
together all the major development areas of the "greater
South East".
16. A particular benefit of this alignment is
that it could be opened in sections and thus start providing benefits
to users and the regions served, as well as a return on the investment,
before the line is completed through to Birmingham. It would certainly
allow links to lines other than the West Coast Main Line, allowing
gains on services to Yorkshire and Humberside and to the North
East as well as to the North West, and freeing up some capacity
on the East Coast and Midland Main Lines for regional passenger
and freight services.
Stations
17. We consider that the proposed location of
a new station at Curzon Street in Birmingham is a poor choice.
There are no links with other public transport services, which
are heavily concentrated around New Street, in the heart of the
city centre, and some distance from the Curzon Street site. This
means that those arriving or departing on HS2 services will need
more time and effort to reach or come from commercial premises
in the centre of Birmingham and will not be able to readily interchange
with local rail, light rail or bus services. They may well lose
some of the time they would have gained by the faster rail journey!
18. In our view, a high speed London-Birmingham
service must use New Street as its Birmingham station, to offer
the optimum level of access and interchange. This does pose a
challenge: the current station is already heavily congested and
ill-equipped to deal with the number of passengers using it. We
are aware that there are plans to rebuild it, and this opportunity
must be used to provide the capacity and quality to equip it as
terminus for high speed trains. Clearly this requires strong and
focused planning by all agencies involved. As a through station,
it would permit flexibility in using nearby stabling and servicing
facilities, to avoid unnecessary platform occupation. Some high
speed—and other—trains might work through to / from
Wolverhampton, as with the current service, thus expanding the
connectivity within the West Midlands. Other trains could go further
beyond the West Midlands, to serve the main centres of the North
West and Wales, if the relevant market and operating case could
be made. (Extension of some trains beyond the main cities served
is a normal feature of the TGV service pattern in France, where
it forms an important component in spreading the connectivity
benefits to other areas within the region.)
19. At the southern end of the proposed route,
we are very doubtful about an expanded Euston. It is well linked
to the London Underground system and near to regional rail systems,
but it would involve massive reconstruction and disruption to
the immediate local area. St Pancras has very good London Underground
links and direct access to the Thameslink regional rail services
(currently being upgraded). It is also the terminus for HS1, thus
providing direct connections where through trains are not available.
Thus St Pancras should in our view be the terminus for HS2. It
also has significantly more room for expansion than Euston.
Shape of the Network
20. We support the proposed "Y" shaped
network for the expansion of high speed rail. The network needs
to serve other cities in the North such as Manchester, Sheffield
and Leeds. It also needs to be connected into the existing rail
network, so that high speed trains can proceed on to other destinations
like Newcastle, in order for such cities and areas to enjoy the
benefits from high speed travel as early as possible. The high
speed network must not become an exclusive network in which only
certain places because of their location can benefit from faster
rail travel.
International Links
21. We believe that it is essential for the HS2
network to connect with HS1, so as to allow operation of through
trains to / from mainland Europe. With HS2 Birmingham would then
be within three hours' travelling time to Brussels and Paris,
ie within the range at which rail travel can make a critical difference
in determining modal choice to favour the train rather than air.
As indicated earlier, there is plenty of evidence from mainland
Europe to suggest that there would be a marked transfer from air
to rail. Indeed emerging findings suggest that, with increased
problems for air travellers, four hour rail journeys might become
competitive with air: for HS2 this could include Birmingham-Rotterdam
/ Koln and Manchester-Brussels / Paris.
22. In comparison, we see no point in building
a specific link to Heathrow off the proposed HS2 line—whether
it is part of phase 1 or phase 2. Most of Heathrow's catchment
lies in the South East, especially in London, and London regional
and Underground services already provide for these. Other connections
to the rest of the South East would not be improved by HS2.Through
rail services to/from Birmingham and indeed other midlands and
northern destinations, could be run along a high speed line down
the M1 corridor. In any case pressure on Heathrow would be reduced
if our proposed through services between Birmingham, Brussels
and Paris reduced cross Channel air travel demand significantly.
There are also question marks about the long term viability of
Heathrow, if it is not going to be expanded.
ECONOMIC RE
-BUILDING AND
IMPACT OF
HIGH SPEED
RAIL
Regional links
23. A key feature is the scale of development
pressures and plans for South East England and the West Midlands.
On existing planning commitments, the "greater South East"
(the former planning regions of the South East, the East of England
and Greater London) is expected to have an extra two million people
and one million extra jobs over the next decade or so. Previous
Governments designated four major growth areas, which remain a
focus for substantial development. These include Milton Keynes
and the South Midlands, whose growth will result in the area becoming
a major conurbation in its own right and equivalent to the city
regions that the intended high speed network is seeking to serve.
To function, therefore, effectively as part of the national and
regional economy, these need to be connected to neighbouring sub
regions and also to the wider world as part of a fast inter-city
network.
24. The West Midlands is also seeking to boost
its economic performance by improving opportunities and competitiveness;
connecting it by improved transport links with London and the
South East would help bring important benefits. High Speed rail
can provide a boost to a resurgent West Midlands economy to enable
that area to share in some of the economic fruits of London and
the South East. For all of these regions, direct links to continental
European centres would bring even greater benefits.
Carbon impact
25. The High Speed Route network will be electrified,
bringing significant advantages. Electric trains offer better
environmental performance, emitting between 20 and 35% less carbon
per seat kilometre than diesel equivalents on the basis of the
current electricity generation mix (Rail Safety and Standards
Board, 2007). This advantage will increase over time as our generation
mix becomes less carbon intensive. Passenger rail CO2 emissions
are significantly below those of road transport and air. While
high speed trains would emit more emissions than conventional
electrified services the new rolling stock required for the trains
will be more energy efficient than existing stock and should have
the advantage of capturing more passengers from more polluting
forms of transport.
CONCLUSIONS
26. We support the need to develop the proposed
HS2 high speed line, but with the following caveats:
— The
HS2 network must be designed and developed as part of a national
railway strategy. This should be framed in the light of national
transport, spatial, environmental and economic planning strategies.
— The
Birmingham high speed line should form part of a wider "Y"
shaped network that would also serve Manchester and Leeds and
major centres in Northern England and Scotland.
— The
HS2 line to Birmingham should be routed along the M1 and M6 corridors.
This would enable the Milton Keynes / South Midlands conurbation
to have fast inter-city and regional services.
— The
network should be opened in phases, with links to the existing
rail network. In this way, it can carry high speed trains that
work through to the main cities in the Midlands and the North,
thus providing some relief to capacity pressures on all three
radial main lines north of London. This would generate economic
and financial gains for the investment ahead of completion of
the whole line.
— There
should be a direct link to HS1 so that high speed and fast domestic
trains may be operated. These would include services from Birmingham
to Brussels / Paris.
— The
Birmingham terminus should be New Street. Its redevelopment should
enable high speed and other trains to work beyond to serve other
centres, within the West Midlands and beyond.
— The
London terminus should be at St Pancras.
May 2011
REFERENCES
Bolden, T & Harman, R (2009), New development:
Fast track to Birmingham. Public Money & Management (January)
European Environment Agency (2008), Beyond transport
policy—exploring and managing the external drivers of transport
demand. EEA Technical Report No: 12/2008
Harman, R (2006), High Speed Trains and the Development
and Regeneration of Cities (Greengauge21, www.greengauge21.net)
Network Rail (2010), West Coast Main Line: Route
Utilisation Strategy—Draft for Consultation (www.networkrail.co.uk)
Rail Safety and Standards Board (2007), Study on
further electrification of Britain's railway network (www.rssb.co.uk/pdf/reports/research/T633_rpt_final.pdf)
UCL Omega Centre (2010), The RAMP Study—Final
Report (ICE, www.ice.org.uk)
| 
