This article is more than 4 years old HS2: if they build it, will people come? This article is more than 4 years old The real argument in favour of HS2 is that it could transform the economies of the Midlands and the north, but better project management and a localised approach is needed to make it work -- * Share via Email Potential HS2 train design. [ ] Potential HS2 train design. HS2 should be built from the North southwards rather than from London northwards. Photograph: HS2/PA It was a gift for opponents of the planned HS2 fast rail link connecting London with the Midlands and the north. A suppressed government report showed that the Department for Transport thought the -- the delays to the electrification of the London-to-Sheffield and Manchester-to-Leeds lines are the unacceptable price being paid for the mounting cost of HS2, a worthy successor to Concorde in the long list of great British white elephants. HS2 – why it’s time to pull the plug on the fantasy | Letters Read more In truth, there is no link between Network Rail’s failure to deliver on its five-year investment plan and the billions being budgeted for HS2 over the next couple of decades. Not yet, at least. But the cost overruns and the missed targets that have led to the transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin “pausing” the electrification upgrades provide little optimism that HS2 will be brought in on its current budget, or anything like it. And, eventually, that would have an impact on transport spending elsewhere. Yet, before HS2 is written off as a extravagance Britain can’t afford, it is worth putting the case for a new high-speed rail line. The argument is not about cutting half an hour off journey times for -- UK’s lowly ranking of 27th in the World Economic Forum’s league table for the quality of infrastructure, there is plenty of room for improvement. Opponents of HS2 are not opposed to spending more on the railways: they simply think that the money could be spent better elsewhere, on smaller and less glamorous projects. -- both in comparison with London and regions in other European countries. No, the real argument in favour of HS2 is that it could transform the economies of the Midlands and the north, acting as the catalyst for faster growth in the way that a hundred piecemeal projects could not. -- transport system are a big part of the UK’s productivity problem. Fair enough, opponents of HS2 might say, but that still falls short of a compelling reason for spending £50bn (and the rest) on a railway line, especially since the opportunity cost, upgrades and new investment that won’t happen, is potentially high. That’s a reasonable point. The argument for HS2 is that it could provide the catalyst for growth in the Midlands and the north. To that extent, George Osborne is justified in talking about the need for a -- Second, the management of projects has to be improved – something that a more localised approach should help deliver. Third, HS2 should be built from the north southwards rather than from London northwards. That would both maximise the benefits to the northern regions and bring them forward in time. Fourth, any overruns on HS2 should not result in raids on the rest of the transport infrastructure budget. Those who see HS2 as just another vanity project will say this is pie in the sky and that the chances of transforming the northern regions lie somewhere between slim and nil. This looks unduly pessimistic. In the right circumstances “build it, they will come” could work. But if HS2 is to be scrapped, it should be scrapped now rather than when billions of pounds have been spent on it. -- * Economics blog * HS2 * Rail transport * Transport -- (BUTTON) Close [p?c1=2&c2=6035250&cv=2.0&cj=1&comscorekw=Economics%2CBusiness%2CHS2%2C Rail+transport%2CUK+news%2CTransport%2CTravel+%26+leisure%2CCities]