Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Britain’s HS2 railway line is a case study “in how not to run a project”, according to a group of MPs, who cast doubt on the Department for Transport’s ability to successfully deliver the remainder of the scheme.
More than 13 years after the high speed rail project linking London and Birmingham received the go-ahead and a year and a half after the northern section to Manchester was cancelled, there was no clarity over the railway’s benefits, costs or completion date, MPs on the cross-party public accounts committee said.
The Department for Transport and HS2 Ltd, the arms-length body set up to deliver the project, shared responsibility for the failures, which risk costing taxpayers billions of pounds, the committee said. But the two organisations had failed to work together successfully and the MPs doubted that either had the “skills or capabilities to make a success of the programme”.
These failures risked reputational damage to the UK, the MPs added, just as chancellor Rachel Reeves is seeking to woo international investment.
Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, chair of the public accounts committee, said HS2 was “a cautionary tale that should be studied by future governments in how not to run a major project”.
“We are sceptical of government’s ability to successfully deliver even a curtailed scheme, one which we already know will on its face bring very poor value for money. The question has instead become: what possible benefit can the government now salvage for the taxpayer, from a mess that presents real risks to the UK’s overall reputation.”
The committee urged the government to lay out to the public what value taxpayers can now expect from their huge investment in the project. The cost of HS2 is predicted to rise from an estimate of £66bn last year to £80bn, the MPs said, but the ultimate figure remains highly uncertain.
A further issue highlighted by the committee is that HS2’s construction contracts are “unacceptable to the public purse”. Although HS2 is trying to renegotiate the contracts to make them better value for money there is little incentive for the contractors to agree, the MPs said. There is also a risk that the main contractors pass any financial consequences down the supply chain to small and medium-sized businesses who may find it more difficult to absorb such changes.
There is no plan as yet for the tunnelling and design of the expanded Euston station, the line’s main terminus in central London. Although private sector finance is being discussed to fund the work at Euston, the MPs said it was unclear if this was feasible. In the meantime, local businesses, residents and passengers would continue to face significant disruption at the station for many years to come, they warned.
Although the transport department and HS2 Ltd have repeatedly said they are learning lessons following past criticisms, there is little evidence that lessons have been applied effectively and mistakes avoided, the MPs added, pointing out that the committee’s own past recommendations had been ignored.
HS2 Ltd said: “Mark Wild, our new chief executive, agrees with the committee’s conclusion that there has been failure in the management of HS2’s cost and schedule. He is taking decisive action to get the project back on track at the lowest feasible cost.”
The Department for Transport said: “The continuously climbing costs of HS2 are completely unacceptable. That is why the government acted swiftly to get the project back under control by bringing new leadership to HS2 Ltd, directing the company to begin work on resetting culture, schedule and costs, and reinstating robust ministerial oversight.
It added: “HS2 Ltd is working with its supply chain to reset the programme and deliver the railway safely and at the lowest reasonable cost.”
