HS2: costs spiral, support dwindles

Support is dwindling for the High Speed 2 (HS2) rail project after former chancellor and transport secretary Alistair Darling and the Institute of Directors (IoD) called for the £40bn scheme to be scrapped. Just 27% of IoD members believe the project, which would link London to Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester via a superfast rail network, represents good value for money.

Worse still, information leaked by the Treasury to the Financial Times suggests the final cost could be £73bn. "HS2 runs the risk of substantially draining the railways of money vital for investment over the next 30 years," says Darling in The Times. The costs are not yet "nailed down" and could spiral. To commit to spending so much on just one project seems "foolish".

Yet the British are more willing to fund wars than invest in infrastructure, writes Will Hutton in The Guardian. The spending on HS2 will be over a period of 15 years, but Britain spent "£40bn on fighting the war in Afghanistan over a dozen years without turning a hair". The game the Treasury is playing by leaking that the project will cost an extra £30bn while "minimising the benefits" is "dangerous". At least with HS2, unlike the war in Afghanistan, "we will have something to show for our efforts".

Try 6 free issues of MoneyWeek today

Get unparalleled financial insight, analysis and expert opinion you can profit from.

Start your trial

Sign up for MoneyWeek’s free twice-daily newsletter.

Join more than 165,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with latest financial news, insights and expert analysis to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.

Join more than 165,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with latest financial news, insights and expert analysis to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.

Sign up

But many of the arguments for HS2 simply don't stack up, writes John Kay in the FT. The claim that the UK should build it simply because other European nations have high-speed rail "does not merit a response". And there are cheaper ways to boost capacity, such as "running longer trains".Yes, many travellers might pay a premium for a faster journey but this "should be paid for by the travellers", not the taxpayer.

As for the prosperity of our regional cities, "the least successful, economically and culturally", is Birmingham which is also already the closest to London. Improving connections between regional cities themselves might be a better idea. "The business case for HS2 does not merit the title of research."

Stay up to date with MoneyWeek:Follow us onTwitter,FacebookandGoogle+