29th December 2012 - As Justine Greening prepares to give the go-ahead to High Speed Rail Two (HS2) in January (despite widespread public opposition), members of Action Groups Against High Speed Two (AGAHST) along with railway expert Chris Stokes, have been giving some thought to what her New Year’s resolutions should be for the UK’s rail network.

AGAHST suggests that the Minister makes the following resolutions as well as abandoning the white elephant that is HS2:

1. Northern Hub - confirm investment in the Northern Hub, (£500m) and Ledburn junction (£243m). Ledburn investment would enable commuter capacity to Milton Keynes and Northampton to be doubled in circa 5 years time relieving overcrowding now. HS2 will not deliver any relief until 2026.

2. Electrification - of the Midland Main Line; Cardiff to Swansea; Reading to Birmingham and Bristol to York

3. Extra rolling stock - in two to three years to relieve existing overcrowding for commuter services in Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Bristol and Paddington

4. Timetable - develop a national interval timetable pattern, with greatly improved connections across the network. Switzerland already has this.

5. Speeds - improve speeds on key regional routes. Liverpool to Manchester line is slower than 100 years ago!

6. Capacity - develop proposals to increase capacity on the really overcrowded routes: Great Eastern; Great Western; South Western and Brighton Main lines. West Coast Main Line is not the priority, as shown by our peak counts

7. Transport strategy - prepare an overall transport strategy and rail / air / road connectivity to include a re-examination of a high speed Heathrow hub development

Commenting on the resolutions, Jerry Marshall, Chairman, AGAHST, says;
“While HS2 might looks good from round the cabinet table, our research shows the public don’t see it as a priority and there are a number of much more affordable developments of the rail network which will dramatically improve the services for commuters and leisure travellers. Let’s hope
Greening uses the Christmas break productively and realises that HS2 is not the answer to any question, let alone rail capacity and regional economic development.”

ends

20th December 2011- A YouGov public opinion poll has found that nearly two thirds of the public oppose money being spent on the planned £32 billion high speed rail link between London and Birmingham (HS2).

5^TH December 2012 – Research carried out by HS2 Action Alliance, and verified by independent research firm CRT Viewpoint, has discovered that long distance trains leaving Euston during the week day, evening peak period (16.30 to 18.59) on the West Coast Main Line (WCML) had an average occupancy rate or load factor of just 56 percent. 

This directly contradicts claims by the DfT and HS2 Ltd that the lack of capacity on the WCML is the central reason why the £32b HS2 rail line needs to be built. 

As Philip Hammond (past Minister for Transport) said to the Transport Select Committee earlier this year;

“If the compelling case for additional capacity... was not there then a large part of the case for high speed rail would be undermined.”

A DfT spokesperson confirmed this weekend their view that;

“HS2 could provide a solution to a long term capacity problem that is very real now and only expected to get worse for at least the next 15 years.    the capacity problem is very real now…”

Manchester

The occupancy of the trains during peak period trains to Manchester was even lower than other destinations at an average of 45%.  This further undermines the business case for second phase of HS2, which is planned to run from Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds. 

Milton Keynes

The loadings on trains making an extra stop at Milton Keynes were significantly higher with an average loading of 107 percent.  But commuters from Milton Keynes to London will have to wait until 2026 – another 15 years for the additional capacity to be provided by HS2, despite cheaper, faster and more effective solutions being available almost immediately.

Fares cliff

The first trains after the peak ends (19.00 to 19.30) had higher loadings (67%).  This demonstrates the effect on demand of the much cheaper fares that kick in when the off peak travel begins.

Commenting on the research findings, Hilary Wharf, director, HS2 Action Alliance, said;

“With extra capacity being at the very centre of the DfT and HS2 Ltd’s argument for the need for the £32 billion project, this research shows that the business case for HS2 is fatally flawed.  Two extra carriages are planned for WCML services in 2012 which will reduce crowding further.

“We had to run our own research because the DfT refused a Freedom of Information request for the load figures.  Having seen how low they really are in the peak it is clear why they tried to hide them.”

Ends

Methodology:

The methodology counted passengers onto each train, on Thursday 17 and Tuesday 22 Nov 2011. A third count took place on Thursday 24^th November 2011.

Over the two days 66 trains were counted. Although the sample is small, CRT Viewpoint say they believe this gives a fair reflection of mid-week loading, away from a holiday period, on two normal working days.

The loading figures are for both first and standard class carriages as counters were unable to board the trains and separate the two classes. All trains were formed of nine car Pendolino’s except the Holyhead and Wrexham services which were formed of 10 car Voyager trains

CRT conducted three audit counts on the three platform access ramps on Tuesday 22^nd November 2011 in order to verify the accuracy of the counts being taken

The methodology used is no different from how many of the train companies do their counts in order to get loading figures.

18th November 2011

IoD members unsure about HS2

• Improvements to existing intercity and commuter lines more important than HS2, say directors
• Directors concerned about value for money
• Larger proportions think that airport capacity increases would improve their productivity

A new comprehensive survey of over 1,200 IoD members reveals that HS2 is a long way down the list of business transport priorities, with a significant number thinking that a new high speed line would represent poor value for money.  The survey, which asked directors for their priorities for new investment as well as their views on the current state of Britain’s transport infrastructure, also reveals that business leaders think that improvements to existing roads are more important than new roads.

Simon Walker, Director General of the Institute of Directors, said:

“Good transport infrastructure is crucial to IoD members up and down the country.  Businesses are not happy with the current state of the UK’s infrastructure, but our survey of IoD members shows that directors want to see improvements to existing roads and rail services above all.  In straightened times, choices will have to be made between some improvements to existing rail lines and a new high speed line, and we want to see the Government take the business view seriously.”

He added:

“IoD members are enthusiastic about airport capacity expansion, but the planning system has held back development.  We need to see bold and financially sound decisions made about upgrading our congested networks.”

The key findings of the survey include:

• 86% think that investment in congested urban roads is important to their business, while 83% think that improvements to existing motorways are important.  By comparison, 49% think that new motorways, and 37% new local roads, are important.
• 79% think that investment in improving existing intercity services is important to their business, compared with 54% who think that high speed rail investment is important.
• 38% think that the public spending required to build HS2 would represent poor value for money, compared with 30% who think it would represent good value.
• 48% think that increases in airport capacity outside London and the South East would have a positive impact on the productivity of their business; 40% think the same for increased airport capacity in London and the South East, and just 23% agree that a new high speed rail line between Birmingham and London would improve their productivity.
• IoD members are not happy with the current state of the UK’s transport infrastructure.  82% think that UK roads are too congested, while 61% think that intercity rail fares are poor value for money.
• 76% think that the planning system has had a negative impact on the speed and ease of completing infrastructure projects over the past decade.

• The IoD conducted a Policy Voice poll of 1,245 members in August 2011.  Directors were asked for their views on the existing state of the UK’s transport infrastructure and their priorities for new investment.

The full survey report can be found at: http://www.iod.com/mainwebsite/resources/document/member_transport_survey_2011.pdf

The original release can be found here: http://press.iod.com/2011/11/18/iod-members-unsure-about-hs2/

8^thNovember 2011– Today’s Transport Select Committee (TSC) report on High Speed Rail Two (HS2) recommends revisions that destroy the business plan case for the £30 billion project, according to opponents of the scheme.

Value of Productivity Gains

In its report, the TSC has called for a revised business plan with ‘a lower value attached to time savings’ (para 69). With faster journey time gains equating to 40 percent of the hoped for economic return delivered by HS2, any reduction in their value pushes the project below the Government’s stated minimum acceptable Net Benefit Return of 1.5.

In addition, if the value of time saved is reduced the need for ultra-high speed rail - which cannot follow existing transport corridors - is removed and alternatives to HS2 become more attractive.  The TSC said that the slower routes were prematurely ruled out (para 68).

Alternatives to HS2

The report also demands that the Government must explain in detail why HS2 is better than alternative solutions (para 107).  A full review of priorities for the rail network and detailed plans for alternatives to HS2 are detailed at www.betterthanhs2.org.

18 trains an hour

To meet the passenger demand projected by HS2 Ltd and the Department for Transport HS2 will need to run 18 trains an hour on the new line.  The TSC report raises concerns on the technical feasibility of HS2, pointing out that “18 trains an hour on a high speed line has not been attempted elsewhere” (para 116). 

Specialist consultants SYSTRAsuggest that delivering this number of trains will require “significant technical and engineering developments”. While HS2 Ltd has stated it will be possible using technology that will be available in the middle of this decade, they have as yet failed to provide evidence of this.

Commenting on the report, Bruce Weston, of HS2 Action Alliance said:

‘When you get past the headlines, the Select Committee has almost as many misgivings about HS2 as we do. 

They agree that the value of time savings is exaggerated, that opting for very high speed is therefore questionable, that the alternatives to a new railway have had insufficient attention, and that the planned intensity of services is a technical risk. 

They are unhappy with the consultation process, feeling that the decision should not be taken before a proper case for the Y is published and consulted upon. 

When you work all this through the case for HS2 simply falls apart.”

Ends

For more information please contact:

1. Overcrowding - HS2 offers no solution to current overcrowding for journeys to Birmingham for 15 years and Leeds and Manchester for 22 years
2. Incremental - Investments in alternatives are incremental  so there is no wasted investment if the significant demand growth forecasted by HS2 does not materialise
3. Quickly – Improvements can be introduced much more quickly than HS2 which offers no respite to train passengers until 2026 at the earliest
4. Low risk – Unlike HS2 the alternative approaches are low risk and can be commercially justified.  WCML capacity can be trebled with targeted investment of the order of £2bn
5. Resilience - Upgrades to existing infrastructure will provide a resilience allowing services to continue if a locomotive breaks down, unlike HS2 that is relying on as yet unavailable technology and a single track
6. 18 Trains/hr – HS2 will not be able to deliver the additional capacity claimed as this relies on running 18 trains per hour which can not technically be done.  HS2 Ltd continues to refuse to release its evidence to justify the claim that 18 trains per hour is possible.
7. Disruption – HS2 will create eight years of significant disruption as Euston is rebuilt.  Significant passenger dispersal problems will be created in London as Kings Cross passengers are diverted from Euston.  The alternative requires none of this work to be carried out.

The Stop HS2 campaign will deliver its petition to Downing Street today, ahead of a Parliamentary debate on the proposed high speed rail network on Thursday. This comes just a month after campaigners were told their petition would not count in terms of getting a Parliamentary debate and they would have to start from scratch. The new Stop HS2 petition, which calls for at least a public inquiry if HS2 is not to be scrapped, is currently 13^th out of almost 8,000 (7905 at time of writing) petitions on the Government e-petitions website.

Ahead of the delivery of the petition, Green Party leader Caroline Lucas MP said: "The supposed "greenest Government ever" showed its true blue colours at last week's Conservative party conference. Let's be clear: HS2 as it stands has little to do with a "green" transport future. It will likely do nothing to reduce transport emissions, nothing to improve local and regional commuter networks on which millions depend, and nothing to reduce the capital's economic dominance over the regions. It's for those reasons and many more that Greens oppose HS2."

Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom, who has been at the forefront of the parliamentary campaign against HS2 said: “This will cost every family in Britain £1000 each, so it’s not good enough to say it’s going to solve a problem, so let’s do it anyway. If money were no object, there’s lots and lots of things like that we might do, but money is an object at a time when this when every penny has to count.”

Former Labour Paymaster General and Coventry MP Geoffrey Robinson said:

“ The existing rail network can be expanded much more cost effectively by investing in new trains, electrification and extended platforms at a fraction of the cost of building HS2.”

Stop HS2 Campaign Coordinator Joe Rukin said:

“The Financial Times, The Economist and The Sunday Telegraph have joined us and several other institutions in questioning the need for HS2, the cost, the lack of benefits and the fact that there are many other more deserving transport projects which should be prioritised first. What people still don’t realise is the fact there is absolutely no environmental case for doing this. People imagine that getting more people onto a high speed train would be good for the environment, but this is simply not the case. Besides the obvious destruction of green spaces and habitats, due to the energy needed to get to the speeds we are talking about. HS2 is also clearly intended to promote air travel. Besides the fact that it will connect airports, any internal flights which might get cancelled will be replaced with new routes, with bigger planes going greater distances.”

“The way that HS2 has progressed so far, without actually looking at what is best for the transport network in a strategic manner is just insane. The public consultation was an absolute farce, with incomplete plans and admissions that many aspects of the work had not been done. At a recent Transport Select Committee meeting, HS2 Chief Engineer Andrew McNaughton still hadn’t got answers to questions we’ve been asking him for over a year now, with the favourite response from the panel being ‘we haven’t done the work on that aspect’. HS2 Ltd still claim they don’t know basic things like what the land take will be, no-one who is directly affected has ever received any direct contact from HS2 Ltd and how they claim they know it will cost £33bn to get to Leeds and Manchester when they haven’t even produced a route yet is beyond me.”

Notes to Editors:

1. For more information contact Joe Rukin on 07811 371880 or Penny Gaines on 07765 780553.
2. The Stop HS2 petition will be handed in to Downing Street at 1.30 (arriving at the gates at 1.20) on Tuesday 11^th October.
3. The HS2 debate in the main chamber of Parliament is expected to start some time after 2pm on Thursday 13^th October. Stop HS2 campaigners will be present at Old Palace Yard (opposite the Palace of Westminster) from 10.30.
4. The Rail Summit takes place at 22 Berners Street, London, W1T 3DD on 12^th & 13^th October ( www.ico.org ). The debate “HS2 – is it in the country’s best interests?” will take place at 3.25 on Thursday 13^th October. Details at  http://www.railsummit.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/284455/C108-Rail-Summit-E05.pdf

People can sign the petition against HS2 via the Stop HS2 website; http://stophs2.org/news/378-petition-government-stop-hs2/ or directly at http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/353.

Media advisory

High Speed 2 Action Alliance to launch alternative manifesto at Tory Conference

• Blue print will save £31bn, deliver faster improvements to UK rail network
• Government urged to scrap plan that will cost £800m planning in this parliament alone

30th September 2011 – High Speed 2 Action Alliance (HS2AA), the campaign against the Government’s plan for a new high speed rail line, will launch its alternative vision for Britain’s future rail network at a fringe meeting at the Conservative Party Conference in Manchester this Sunday.

The document, A Better Railway for Britain, which has been prepared by leading railway experts and economists, will highlight ways to improve the nation’s railway infrastructure using existing track at a fraction of the cost of the government’s planned £33bn project, HS2.

The manifesto will also highlight inherent flaws in the current HS2 plan, which will exacerbate the country’s north-south divide, disrupt rail services for a large number of commuters and fail to deliver any of its green promises.

The launch of the manifesto on Sunday will be attended by politicians from the conservative party. Speakers include Chris Stokes, the document’s co-author and former director of the Strategic Rail Authority, and Jerry Marshall, chairman of AGAHST, the Action Groups Against High Speed Two, who will chair the meeting.

HS2AA plan to have a high profile at the conference’s Manchester venue, where at 11am on Sunday they will also unveil an advertisement campaign highlighting the fact that the planning budget for HS2 in this parliament alone - £800m – would be enough to pay the salaries of 19,000 police officers.

Their response to the select committee fails to give credible answers

9 September 2011– Analysis by HS2AA of the written responses by the Department for Transport’s (DfT) and High Speed Two Ltd (HS2) to questions from the Transport Select Committee shows how in 40 pages they fail to patch the holes in their case.

Bruce Weston, reviewing these submissions said “It’s clear that the Government has no real answers to the many questions that the Select Committee has raised on the heart of their case. Rather than continuing to offer misrepresentations and invalid justifications, it is time for the Government to reconsider their commitment to HS2”.

21 June - Commenting on today’s Oxera report on the case for high speed rail, Jerry Marshall, Chairman of Action Groups Against High Speed Two said:

"This report shows that Philip Hammond's high speed rail project is going off the rails. It shows that the Government's case is shot throgh with uncertainty and that the estimates of the benefits are based on a full network to Manchester and Leeds, yet the Department have only done detailed work on the first stage from London to Birmingham. The DfT's consultation is fundamentally flawed and should be halted until this detailed work has been carried out.

14 June 2011 - A new YouGov poll shows that the Government’s plan for a second high speed rail line is viewed as a bad use of public money by most Labour voters in the Midlands and Wales.

48% of respondents in the region who said they would vote Labour if there was an election tomorrow believe the new rail line, which is set to run initially from London to Birmingham and then to Manchester and Leeds, is too costly and want to see funds spent on other public services. Only 35% agreed High Speed Rail would eventually generate more money than it cost and help to break down the North-South divide.

13 June 2011 - A new analysis of the Government’s proposal to spend £34b on a High Speed Rail network (HS2) has revealed that the route of the second stage – Birmingham to Manchester/Leeds - would cut through swathes of the country north of Birmingham whose residents are unaware that they will be affected.

30 March 2011 - Hilary Wharf of HS2ActionAlliance said:

“The Taxpayers’ Alliance is right. The Government’s case for high speed rail just doesn’t stack up. Numerous towns and cities will see train services cut and cheaper alternatives to improve the network and deliver more capacity have not been properly considered. Instead the Government plan to spend £30bn on a project the country cannot afford, for the benefit of the rich. Average take-home pay has fallen by £1,000 since the downtown started. Every household in the country is set to lose a further £1,000 if these plans go ahead. We don’t need it and we cannot afford it. High speed rail must be stopped before it becomes the most expensive white elephant in British history.”

29 March 2011– Analysis by HS2AA of the Department for Transport’s (DfT) new business case for High Speed Two (HS2) - issued on the 28^th February as part of the public consultation - has identified that the actual return on Phase 1 of the new line could be as low at 30p in the pound not the claimed £1.60.

26 July 2010- The Secretary of State Rt Hon Philip Hammond announced the results of the Exceptional Hardship Scheme (EHS) consultation for HS2 on Monday 26 July.  An EHS will be introduced next month, and there will be some further arrangements announced later in the year (to apply from when the route is settled).

June 2010 - Problems with the business case for the proposed high speed rail link between London and Birmingham mean that alternatives to HS2 should be adopted, a report by railway analysts, Bruce Weston and Hilary Wharf, for HS2 Action Alliance, says today.

August 2010 - ‘HS2 represents potentially the biggest single commitment of public funds within a generation for transport and has the potential to be a great white elephant’ said Kathryn Gurney of HS2AA this morning and yet ‘the Government has not demonstrated it represents value for money, is green, or has the much vaunted wider economic benefits’.

HS2 Action Alliance calls for ‘white elephant’ to be scrapped

27 October 2010- HS2 Action Alliancefinds it inexplicable that HS2, a project with a fatally flawed business case, could possibly be thought value for money by the Government, particularly when the country is facing unprecedented public spending cuts across the board.

Report ignores costs and funding for any new services

16 February 2011 - Greengauge21 issued a report yesterday (15/2/011) ‘Capturing the benefits of HS2 on existing lines’, presenting a superficially attractive wish list of improved services everywhere on the existing rail network. 

20 November 2010 -  The Secretary of State (SoS) says in recent speeches and correspondence that he is unconvinced that the alternatives to HSR proposals are credible[1]or practical[2]options.

So let’s look at his six arguments in terms of the facts his own Department have published.