Written evidence from the Association
of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) (HSR 160)
The Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC)
represents train operators in Great Britain. We welcome the chance
to submit this evidence to the Transport Committee on the case
for High Speed Rail.
1. The main arguments for High Speed Rail—ATOC's
View
1.1 ATOC firmly backs the principle of the provision
of a new high speed link to the Midlands and beyond to provide
greater capacity to allow more people and freight to use rail.
1.2 The development of high speed rail and in particular
High Speed 2 (HS2), with the Y-shaped network that the Government
proposes, sets a clear, long-term plan that will help bring significant
journey time gains to and from many regions of the country, including
the North West, Yorkshire, the North East and Scotland. It will
also release capacity on all three of the existing North—South
main line corridors (the West Coast, Midland and East Coast Main
Lines).
1.3 Beyond these immediate impacts, a high speed
rail network of this kind would provide substantial, broader benefits
in development and environmental terms. In particular, it would:
1.3.1 improve the economic development of the
regions served, increase their competitiveness and reduce their
peripherality,
1.3.2 contribute to the country's longer-term
environmental goals by attracting passengers from air and car,
whilst also taking the pressure off runway capacity in London
and the South East, and
1.3.3 through the release of rail capacity, unlock
the development of improved commuter and regional services on
today's North-South main lines, particularly the West Coast, whilst
permitting improvement in both the capacity and transit times
of freight services. The latter would make a significant contribution
to the development of the strategic freight network that the rail
industry has been developing since 2007.
1.4 The lead time for development and construction
of High Speed One (HS1) was 20 years and this is why it is right
to plan now for new high-speed lines that will be required beyond
2020. ATOC, together with Network Rail and the Rail Freight Operators'
Association, has been actively working on a network-wide approach
to investment looking at growth trends over the next Control Period
(CP5) and the next 25 years and, in Planning Ahead 2010: the Long
Term Planning Framework set out an initial viewpoint.[253]
This document sets out the industry's view on where it should
be going in terms of long term improvements in customer satisfaction,
capacity, carbon emissions and performance. It provides the planning
background both for CP5 and for longer-term investment plans such
as HS2 whilst also setting out the need to continue to fund upgrades
of the capacity and capability of existing routes, in line with
the strategies the industry is now developing, where there is
a good business case for doing this and the costs involved are
demonstrable value for money.
2. The strategic route
2.1 ATOC welcomes the Government's conclusion that
the line should be planned as a Y-shaped network serving not only
Birmingham but also Manchester, the East Midlands, Sheffield and
Leeds. The earlier plans for a route to Birmingham alone would
have limited the benefits that high speed rail could bring; the
new plans for a Y-shaped network set much clearer goals and will
deliver greater advantages, in particular by offering high speed
services to and from Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Sheffield.
On these routes, today's current journey times of 2 to 2.5 hours
to London can readily be reduced to 1 to 1.5 hours. The Y-shaped
network with connections to Birmingham will also improve connectivity
between many of the cities in England's central belt to underpin
economic regeneration here as well.
2.2 We also welcome the Government's commitment to
explore further options with the Scottish Government for reducing
journey times to and from Scotland, although we expect that the
costs involved here are likely to mean that the tradeoff will
be between new route construction and selective upgrades of the
existing routes. Scotland will gain some immediate journey time
benefits from the first stage project now being consulted on,
with Anglo-Scottish expresses able to use the new high speed line
south of the Trent Valley and further savings would be possible
once the Y-shaped network reaches the North West.
2.3 ATOC also supports the Government's decision
to base the London terminal of the high speed line at Euston.
A comprehensive view is needed here of the additional demand
this will pose for the already crowded tube network. One option
that ATOC and Network Rail have looked at is the possible diversion
of London Midland services at Willesden into the new Crossrail
network. This would release track and platform capacity at Euston
whilst bringing commuters directly into the West End rather than
having to change onto tube and bus services. Such a project would
potentially also permit the HS2 platforms to be accommodated within
a smaller station "footprint" due to the release of
suburban platforms, facilitating reduced disruption during the
station's rebuilding.
2.4 ATOC is pleased to see that phase 2 of the programme
is now planned to include a spur to Heathrow. The examples of
France, Germany and Spain show that a high speed rail network
can abstract air traffic without having stations directly at airports,[254]
however a direct airport link may make sense in the longer term,
providing a sound business case is proven. The spur solution
will avoid the journey time penalty that diverting the HSL via
Heathrow would have created and will also unlock the potential
for additional extensions of the high speed network to the South
and South West.
2.5 The decision to carry out preparatory works for
an eventual link to HS1 is important as, providing a good business
case can be established, it will allow the development of journey
opportunities into the wider European high speed network, not
only from the Midlands and the North, but also from Heathrow,
the West and the South West. The establishment of a link to HS1
will also accord closely with the EU's 2011 Transport White Paper
objectives to complete a pan-European high-speed rail network,[255]
enabling links into existing high speed services across the EU
(eg to Lyon, Bordeaux, Amsterdam, Cologne and Frankfurt) .
2.6 The proposed Crossrail Interchange station at
Old Oak Common would provide links into Central London and to
Heathrow, but ATOC believes the longer-term business case for
all HS2 and most Great Western trains to call at this station
needs to be examined carefully. This strategy would undermine
the journey time benefits of HS2 and journey times on the Great
Western from London to Reading, Bristol, South Wales and the South
West would be increased if stops on Great Western trains were
introduced. In the longer term, following a Heathrow spur, some
of the advantages of Old Oak Common as an HS2 interchange station
for high speed services would naturally disappear and an overall
balance therefore needs to be struck between interchange benefits,
journey time disbenefits and the timing of any eventual direct
link to Heathrow.
2.7. The proposed station at Birmingham, Curzon Street
is in a good location for the city but ATOC believes that planning
for it needs to accommodate fast, local links into the city centre
and to the existing rail services at New Street and Moor Street
stations. This might be accommodated by light rail.
3. The fit with Government's Transport Policy
Objectives
3.1 HS2 makes a significant contribution to improving
city to city journey times and capacity, not only to and from
London but also between the Midlands and the conurbations in the
central belt, both east and west of the Pennines. The main motorways
in these areas, the M1 and M6, are already at capacity due to
the high levels of short to medium distance traffic; beyond measures
to promote a smoother flow of traffic, there are few alternatives
to expand the Motorways to accommodate further growth. By taking
long distance traffic from the motorways, HS2 could play a role
in reducing congestion on these routes and delaying the time when
more substantial measures might be needed to improve capacity.
3.2 An important aspect of high speed service planning
is to operate trains beyond high speed lines over the "classic"
network. Around two-thirds of the train-mileage operated by TGVs
in France is on the classic network, with the trains using the
high speed lines to reduce journey times on the main corridors.
In Germany, the equivalent proportion for the ICE network is
even higher. High speed trains based on advanced rail technology
have the advantage of being compatible with the conventional rail
network, so that they can use existing city centre stations or
run through to destinations where new construction cannot be justified.
3.3 One of the principal benefits of a new high speed
network in Britain would be the creation of additional capacity
to meet the growing needs of passengers and freight customers
across the network, both on high speed and "classic"
lines. A recent report by Greengauge 21 (of which ATOC is a member)
on "Capturing the benefits of HS2 on existing lines"[256]
demonstrates that the building of HS2 would also allow the delivery
of a wide range of improvements and increased capacity on traditional
lines to the North West of London, in the West Midlands and beyond.
3.4 The impact of HS2 on freight services running
on the classic network will also be positive. The release of
capacity by the reduction of faster services will be exponential,
since the speed of freight services will be more closely matched
to that of the existing and new passenger services. This could,
in effect, see the replacement of a fast service transferred from
the classic network by both a new semi-fast regional service and
an additional freight service.
3.5 A wide package of regional benefits could be
enabled by the release of capacity on the classic network that
HS2 allows. The following improvements at regional stations exemplify
what could be implemented—and which would not be possible
without HS2:
3.5.1 Trent Valley (Lichfield, Tamworth, Nuneaton)
30-minute services to London
and the North West.
3.5.2 Coventry
An improved package of, regular
local and fast services to Birmingham.
Cross-country services to/from
North West, the South doubled from hourly to 30-minutes.
Maintain a high frequency
(30-minute) fast service to London through use of more economic
service options (eg shorter trains in off-peak).
New north—south service
options possible due to the release of capacity at Coventry eg:
Nuneaton—Coventry—Kenilworth
(new station)—Leamington/Stratford.
Coventry—Kenilworth
(new station), Bicester, High Wycombe (& London).
3.5.3 Rugby
30-minute services to London
and the North West. Presently hourly to London, irregular
to North West.
3.5.4 Northampton
Five trains per hour to London
(fastest 46 mins) in the peak. Presently three trains per
hour (fastest 59 mins).
3.5.5 Milton Keynes
Nine peak fast London services
per hour. Presently four trains per hour.
Regular (hourly/30 minutes)
direct services to West Midlands, Manchester, Liverpool and Scotland.
Presently irregular or off-peak.
Potentially, new journey opportunities
on services to/from new East—West Rail Link (Oxford—Milton
Keynes - Bedford).
3.5.6 Watford
Opportunities for regular
frequency (30 minute) services to/from the West London Line and
south London.
3.6 The case for HS2 is also supported by recent
trends in modal shift from domestic air routes to rail. ATOC's
latest findings[257]
show that the delivery of improved, faster, rail services has
led to a major transfer from air to rail. Between 2008 and 2010,
the market share for rail on the London - Manchester corridor
rose from 69% to 79% whilst between London and Glasgow it rose
from 12% to 20%. These figures indicate that the further improvements
that HS2 can bring will deliver even greater modal shift and will,
as French TGV services have done, wipe out demand for domestic
air travel on many routes. The major shifts in travel patterns
that this can promote will deliver additional environmental benefits
in terms of reduced emissions.
3.7 High speed rail will deliver a form of transport
that has the potential to be extremely low in terms of carbon
consumption, as a consequence of the "decarbonisation"
of electricity supply which is being planned by Government to
meet national carbon reduction targets. Analysis by ATOC for
Greengauge 21[258]
has shown that a journey by present high speed rail services generates
only 33% of the CO2 emissions of a comparable car journey and
25% of the emissions of an equivalent journey by air and this
advantage will widen over time. Although energy use increases
with speed, the sophisticated design of high speed trains together
with their high load factors substantially offsets this.
3.8 An issue that ATOC has long been concerned about
is the risk that spending on HS2 might draw funding away from
the existing "classic" network. In our view, it is
important not to view these as competing options: the "classic"
network is complementary to HS2 both in acting as a feeder to
the high speed services and in enabling the wider benefits across
the rail network that HS2 can allow. We were very encouraged
by the outcome of Spending Review 2010, in which the Government
recognised this point and safeguarded investment in the "classic"
network whilst also setting aside substantial funding to take
HS2 forward. The McNulty "value for money" review will
be key in setting out the way forward in terms of the affordability
of future investment but the point remains that a balanced approach
to rail investment will remain important.
4. Business Case
4.1 ATOC notes that HS2's cost estimates are higher
than those assumed by the Network Rail and Greengauge 21 studies
but still generate a positive business case, with a benefit/cost
ratio of 2:1. However, to ensure efficient delivery, ATOC believes
that the opportunity should be taken to review these costs and
to assess the benefits of wider private sector involvement in
construction and operation. This will both help maintain firm
control on costs and create a clear commercial link between the
revenues earned from the line and the costs incurred to achieve
them which can help offset the risk of cost increases. The UK's
train operators have wide experience of high speed operation,
including Southeastern and Eurostar on High Speed One and of the
demand and growth patterns in the regions to be served and we
have met HS2 on a number of occasions to share this experience.
4.2 We do not support the position taken by some
commentators that a further upgrade of the existing West Coast
Main Line (WCML) would be a better alternative to building HS2.
The recent upgrade of the WCML cost about £9 billion, caused
significant disruption to existing services and the limited additional
capacity it delivered is likely to be consumed at peak time well
before 2020. There are also significant physical limits on what
could be done next: for example construction of two new parallel
tracks alongside the existing line would be impossible in some
locations and the curvature of the route would still constrain
line speeds to similar levels as those of today.
4.3 There are probably opportunities to improve the
business case by challenging aspects of its cost and it is to
be expected that, as the project progresses, the business case
will evolve further, not least through the application of the
findings of the Value for Money review.
May 2011
253 Planning for CP5; Planning Ahead 2010: The Long
Term Planning Framework - see www.networkrail.co.uk Back
254
The networks in France and Germany, for example, initially focussed
on city to city centre traffic and were only extended to airports
(specifically Lyon, Paris Charles de Gaulle and Frankfurt) later
on. Back
255
"Roadmap to a single European Transport Area" - EU Commission
DG MOVE - http://ec.europa.eu/transport/strategies/2011_white_paper_en.htm Back
256
High Speed Rail - Capturing the benefits of HS2 on existing lines.
Greengauge 21 February 2011. Back
257
"Shift from air to rail heralds "turning point"
in how people travel between UK's main cities" ATOC, 5 April
2011. Back
258
Energy consumption and CO2 impacts of High Speed Rail: ATOC analysis
for Greengauge 21, ATOC, April 2009 Back
| 
