MPs have said that there is a ‘good case’ for the HS2 high speed rail link between London and Birmingham, although their report, issued this week, provided ammunition for both sides of the debate.

image expired

The House of Commons Transport Committee has described the £32 billion scheme, which would cut the journey time to 50 minutes, as offering a "new era of inter-urban travel in Britain". However, as the scheme will not be completed until 2026 and most of the prospected development cuts across farmland, those within the industry have questioned the cost to benefit ratio of the plans, which will undoubtedly cause serious disruption.

The London to Birmingham route is proposed as the first stage of a Y-shaped network linking London and Birmingham and then branching off to Manchester and Leeds. As a proviso made in its report, the transport committee said ministers must "firmly commit" to this second stage before seeking parliamentary approval for the London to Birmingham route.

MPs also said that what should have been a serious and factually-based debate had "too often been reduced to name-calling" and declared that government must "desist from disparaging opponents as nimbys". Finally, they sought assurance that investment in HS2 must not lead to rail cutbacks elsewhere.

Critics comment on report’s shortcomings

Critics of the scheme have suggested that, even in the Transport Committee report, the economic benefits of the project are not made completely clear. Furthermore, they say carbon reduction credentials do "not to stand up to scrutiny" and have questioned the case for including Heathrow as part of the line and the feasibility of the quoted 18 trains an hour frequency.

From the farming industry perspective, the NFU, which supplied information to the consultation on the project in July, has raised questions over the impact on food production and the farming industry, which, the union points out, will be a key component of creating a sustainable economy.

Following the NFU’s submission to the consultation earlier this year, NFU planning policy adviser Ivan Moss said, "We have raised concerns over the scale of economic benefits of the rail link and impacts on farmers. Given the comparatively low benefit to cost ratio of the project, we are concerned other infrastructure projects that could aid competitiveness in UK agriculture may go unfunded as a consequence of this development.

"If the project does go ahead, we have set out what we expect to see in terms of compensation for land purchase, and we would want to see an enforceable code of practice in place during the construction phase."

A further announcement on the HS2 plans is expected by mid-December, before the parliamentary recess.