This week the government announced the award of £6.6bn worth of contracts covering most of the engineering work for the HS2 high-speed line between London and Birmingham, including tunnels and bridges. At the same time international expert Michael Byng has published a report "estimating that each mile of the initial section will cost over £400m, almost twice the official figure", says the FT. He claimed that this would "result in a £104bn price tag for the full project" in contrast to the government estimate of £55.7bn itself double the estimate when HS2 was first mooted.
The project "is important because Britain's railways are reaching capacity", says The Times. Indeed, "both the east and west coast main lines are now so busy that any breakdown or delay can disrupt thousands of passengers for hours". Even if the trains were running at normal speeds, "the extra routes to the north would be needed". So it's a pity the government has let the project "race through common sense, fiscal controls and public support", with the result that it is expected to be "the most expensive railway in the world". Westminster "needs to get a grip"... and "enforce financial discipline".
HS2 fans have talked of a "jobs bonanza", adds Nils Pratley in The Guardian, but can't this be delivered more cheaply in different ways? Indeed, most people "would happily settle for a conventional railway to expand capacity on the west coast if the savings could be spent on the NHS" or "a serious housebuilding programme".
Subscribe to MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
