As Cost of U.K. Rail Project Grows, So Does Resistance
|
Version 0 of 1. ALTOFTS, England — A proposed high-speed railroad known as HS2 is Britain’s biggest and most controversial transportation plan, a Continental-style “grand projet” meant to ease crowded trains and congested tracks, reduce automobile traffic and generate economic growth. Supported by the three main political parties, High Speed 2 is also supposed to help rebalance Britain’s lopsided economy, spreading wealth from the affluent southeast to the scrabbling, post-industrial north. Yet as cost estimates have risen — the budget now stands at £42.6 billion, or $65.8 billion — so has opposition to the project. And some of the strongest resistance comes from the very parts of the north that HS2 is supposed to help. Few dispute that Britain’s creaking rail network needs an update. A report commissioned by a British trade union last year said the country’s railways compared poorly in terms of affordability, comfort and speed with those of Germany, France, Spain and Italy. David Higgins, head of Network Rail, which oversees Britain’s tracks and stations, has said that 30 years of continuous investment would be necessary to bring the quality of the British railroad system up to the level of the best networks on the Continent. But a popular rebellion against HS2, which began in scenic and affluent areas along the first section of the planned line, between London and Birmingham, has spread northward. “We do need investment in the north, we do need a rebalanced economy and we do need better transport infrastructure,” said Peter Box, leader of Wakefield Council, a municipality of 326,000 people in an area once dominated by a coal mining industry that is now moribund. “At the moment, we are not convinced the economic case has been made.” Civic leaders in nearby Leeds, where the high-speed trains would stop, favor the project. But in Wakefield, where few jobs would be created or benefits derived, skepticism prevails. Currently, trains from Wakefield station can reach London in 1 hour and 55 minutes. Traveling from Leeds to London on HS2 would take just 82 minutes, an hour less than currently. But for residents of Wakefield, getting to Leeds to catch one of the high-speed trains would offset much of the time saved. Stephen Abson of nearby Altofts says he dreads imagining the noise here if the rail link goes ahead as planned, with trains zipping by at 225 miles per hour, or about 360 kilometers per hour, only a few hundred yards from his home. The owner of a real estate business, Mr. Abson says the project is already depressing house prices in the area a full two decades before the line would open. And a speedier Leeds-to-London ride would not help Mr. Abson and his neighbors, because the high-speed trains will bypass Wakefield, their local station. “I think we can get enough people on board to realize that this is one big white elephant,” said Mr. Abson. Mr. Box, of Wakefield Council, argues that highway repairs and upgraded regional rail links should be higher priorities than HS2, which he worries may mainly benefit the south. Instead of attracting investment and talent to the northern regions, he said, HS2 may simply funnel more people and prosperity into London. Some critics agree, noting that when Japan and South Korea built their high-speed rail systems, the economic gap between those countries’ capitals and outlying cities widened. Britain has just one high-speed rail line, HS1, connecting London to Continental Europe via the Channel Tunnel. HS2 would extend that line northward. Phase one of the project would link London to Birmingham, with trains making the journey in 49 minutes. Work is to start in 2017, with trains running by 2026. The cost ceiling is £21.4 billion at 2011 prices, though the target is to spend just £17.16 billion. These plans have provoked fierce opposition along parts of HS2’s proposed route, especially in a scenic, hilly region known as the Chilterns, where many parliamentary seats are held by the dominant Conservative Party. Under phase two, for which an additional £21.2 billion has been budgeted, HS2 would split into two branches, with one branch going northwest to Manchester. Trips there from London would take just 68 minutes. The other branch would run directly north to Leeds, with service starting in 2033. Supporters say HS2 makes sense because Britain needs new track to deal with growing demand, and the extra cost of high-speed rail provides good value. As well as hastening journeys, HS2 would free up crowded freight routes and ease congestion on regional passenger trains, the government says, while supporting the creation of 100,000 new jobs. But in a recent report, the National Audit Office, an impartial watchdog, questioned some government calculations and said that it was too early to conclude “whether the program is likely to deliver value for money.” The Department for Transport “has poorly articulated the strategic need for a transformation in rail capacity and how High Speed 2 will help rebalance economic growth,” the audit office added. Peter Mandelson, a cabinet member in the previous government that approved HS2, now says that the economic case “needs to be gone into with more thoroughness than we did at the time.” Mr. Mandelson said he was worried that “the effort, energy and resources for HS2 in the north will be at the expense of the rest of the rail network outside London.” But Simon Burns, the minister responsible for rail, argues that without modernization, capacity on the main line that serves the west of England will be exhausted sometime between 2020 and 2024. “If you do nothing there will be full capacity on the west coast main line in the next 10 years,” he said, “and then you’ll have complaints that we have not reacted to meet the ever-increasing number of people using the railways.” “There were people who argued against the building of the motorways in the late 1950s and early 1960s,” Mr. Burns said. “But very few people now would suggest that that was the wrong decision.” His arguments are unlikely to convince campaigners like Paul Dainton, a mainstay in a group in Yorkshire called Altofts and Kirkthorpe Against HS2. “People have put their life savings into houses and property.” Mr. Dainton said, “But I don’t think it’s just that. It’s the upheaval, and the destruction of their environment.” At the village of Kirkthorpe, John Tod, who works for a bank, said he was horrified to discover that the train’s proposed route passed close to his home. “I moved here because it was so quiet,” he said as he walked his dog in fields that could be churned up to make way for the railroad. “It’s only a small village. Blink and you miss it.” Besides, he said, he sees little need for a faster train to London. “It’s only a two-hour trip at the moment,” he added. “It’s not exactly the Trans-Siberian Express.” |