Conservatives announce a world-class rail link to cut pollution and deliver major economic regeneration to the North.
While other countries in Europe and Asia have harnessed the power of high-speed rail, Britain’s railway system lags way behind. We will open a competition for the next phase of high-speed rail immediately on taking office – to enable construction to start by 2015. And we will cancel all moves towards a third runway at Heathrow.
The problem ...
Labour have failed to modernise our transport system for the 21st century – roads are choked, trains are overcrowded and pollution is rising. An inadequate transport system has also contributed to a North-South divide in the economic health of our country.
Overcrowded trains. According to Government statistics, the most overcrowded trains on the network are running at over 170 per cent capacity.[1] Capacity constraints on West Coast Mainline mean a second line will be necessary by 2015-2025 if there is no investment in a high-speed alternative.[2]
Polluting transport rising. Under Labour, the number of cars on our roads has increased by a quarter – to 34 million vehicles,[3] amongst the highest rate of car ownership in Europe. Highly polluting internal flights are also increasing – there were 417,000 in 2007, a rise of over 10 per cent in the last five years.[4]
North-South divide. The north is lagging behind – according to the Treasury, the north of our country produces £30bn less per year than the UK average,[5] and unemployment is around 25 per cent higher.
Our high-speed solution ....
There is a strong business case for high-speed rail,[7] and international experience shows major economic benefits,[8] but the Government has ruled it out and no one at the Department of Transport is looking into this idea. [9]Immediately on taking office we will open a competition to build a new high-speed rail (HSR) link between London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. We have conducted a detailed desktop feasibility study in consultation with leading industry experts, and our HSR link will yield major social, environmental and economic benefits. We would also back a scheme along the lines of the innovative proposal put forward by the engineering firm Arup, to link Heathrow into the main rail network and a high speed link to St Pancras. The benefits of high speed rail include:
Faster, less crowded high-speed lines. Even the fastest trains from London to Manchester currently take over two hours. HSR would slash this to just 80 minutes:[10]
Faster, less crowded standard lines. HSR will also create significant additional capacity on the existing lines for both freight and passengers, improving commuter services. Network Rail states that each service moved to HSR can be replaced by a larger number of stopping services[11] delivering major benefits for passengers living in places like Macclesfield, Stafford and Milton Keynes.
Cutting pollution. HSR is up to 50 times less polluting per passenger mile than cars and 70 times less than highly polluting internal flights. For example, analysis by Alstom[12] shows their AGV high-speed trains emit only 2.2 grammes of CO2 per passenger per km compared to 153 grammes for aircraft:
Adding capacity at Heathrow airport. HACAN figures suggest that adding a London-Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds line with a link to Heathrow could replace up to 66,500 flights per year – 30 per cent of the capacity of a third runway.[13] This could rise to 44 per cent with a more extensive high-speed network in the UK. And with more high-speed lines, and increased use of high-speed lines for journeys from the UK to Europe, the figure could rise dramatically in the future.
Regeneration. High-speed rail would ensure a much better linkage between the economies of north and south, producing major regeneration benefits. And a recent industry study showed Birmingham would receive a positive GDP impact with a present value of £5.2bn over a 60-year period, plus gains in employment and inward investment, as a result of a HSR link with London.[14]
Costs ...
A Conservative government will contribute £1.3bn per year (in today’s money) to the cost of track and land for the high-speed line from London to Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds.
If the upfront cost of track and land is met by government, high-speed train operators could make healthy returns and pay a franchise fee – according to analysis based on figures produced by engineering consultants, Atkins, using the same ticket prices as existing standard-speed services.
Our £1.3bn annual contribution can be met from 2015-27 within current annual levels of government capital spend on rail. We will make HSR a priority during this period, deferring roughly 25 per cent of current annual capital spending to rail. By way of comparison, building a second standard-speed West Coast line would require some 17 per cent of other likely capital spending on rail.[15]
Given the economic, social and environmental advantages of HSR, it would be a missed opportunity to spend nearly as much on a second standard-speed line that would deliver far fewer benefits and would earn lower franchise fees for the taxpayer.
Delegates welcome plan announcement at Tory Conference
[1] Freedom of Information request published on DfT website, July 2008
[2] National Audit Office, The Modernisation of the West Coast Main Line, November 2006; DfT, Towards a Sustainable Transport System, October 2007; Atkins, Because Transport Matters, March 2008
[3] DfT (2007) Vehicle Licensing Statistics 2007, p.4, Table 1.1
[4] Hansard, 2 April 2008, Col. 1006W
[5] Regional Economic Performance, HM Treasury, December 2006
[6] Labour Force Survey, Regional Monthly Data, August 2008
[7] Transport Select Committee, Minutes of Evidence, 16 April 2007, Q:64
[8] See High-speed Rail: International comparisons, Steer Davies Gleave, 2004
[9] DfT, Delivering a Sustainable Railway, July 2007, p. 9; Hansard, 26 March 2008, Col. 172W; Hansard, 1 April 2008, Col. 739W
[10] Atkins, High-speed Line Study: Summary Report, 2004; Greengauge 21; *time for Leeds calculated as average of London-Birmingham and London-Manchester times
[11] The Times, 29 June 2008
[12] www.alstom.com, The AGV: clean and energy-efficient
[13] Short-haul flights from HACAN (2006) published in RMT, Who says there is no alternative, June 2008, p.4-5; third runway figures from DfT, Adding Capacity at Heathrow, 2007, p. 38
[14] North-South Connections, Steer Davies Gleave, 2007
[15] According to Atkins, a new standard-speed line would cost 70 per cent of the cost of a high-speed line, Atkins, Because Transport Matters, March 2008, p. 7