By John Thornton | 10 December 2013
Should the UK invest in high-speed rail to modernise its infrastructure and support growth? Take a ride from Shanghai to find out
As a taxpayer do I really want to spend £42bn on High Speed 2 so that I can travel from London to Birmingham 30 minutes faster? I was far from convinced and, it was clear from the clamour in the press, I was not alone. Then I rode the bullet train from Shanghai to Beijing.
Sometimes you have to experience the future to recognise the inadequacy of the present. The 800-mile journey takes under four hours, averaging over 200mph, making it the fastest scheduled train network in the world. The comparable journey on the fastest conventional trains running on the parallel railway takes nearly 10 hours. This was not an adrenalin rush, just a comfortable ride, in a stable, air-conditioned carriage, which felt much smoother than UK trains travelling at a quarter of the speed.
This is the sort of modern rail system that every developed country should have. Indeed, many countries do already enjoy such services.
France’s flagship TGV services have been touching 200mph since 1981. The Thalys services, which can reach 180mph, serve destinations across much of Western Europe. And many other countries, particularly in Asia, are now investing heavily in high-speed rail networks. The fastest of these is the Maglev Train, the magnetic levitation line that carries passengers out to Shanghai International Airport at speeds of up to 268mph, making it the world’s fastest train in regular commercial service since its opening in 2004.
Reliable and efficient infrastructure forms the backbone of a modern economy. However, our own rail and road networks are reaching capacity, and much of our physical infrastructure dates back to the Victorians. Most of our inter-city services operate at 125mph (201km/h) or less, with main lines such as the East Coast and Great Western services still relying on ageing diesel locomotives. Our only high-speed service, the Eurostar (HS1), travels at 186mph and operates only on the 68-mile London to Folkestone link and into the Channel Tunnel. The UK is being left behind.
Also, compared to China, we take a long time to make things happen. When it won the right to host the 2008 Summer Olympics, Beijing built eight new subway/metro lines in four years, and now has another three under construction that will be completed in the next three years. Shanghai will open four new metro lines in the next two years. It took only three years to construct the Maglev train and three years to build and start the bullet train service between Shanghai and Beijing. Contrast these timelines with the 13 years that it will take to complete Crossrail in London, after many years of deliberation, and the expectation that the HS2 links to Manchester and Leeds might be completed by 2033.
We all know that it is much more difficult to fund and implement major projects in a modern, democratic country at a time of austerity, but there are some things you just have to do to modernise a country’s infrastructure and maintain competitiveness. The UK showed some of what we are able to do for the 2012 Olympics – could we have a bit more of this vision and pace please?
However, whilst I am now a strong supporter of a high-speed rail infrastructure, I am still not convinced that it is worth £42bn. But the alternative appears to be years of disruption, with an ageing system and patched network slowly grinding towards inevitable gridlock.
Is it time to bite the bullet (train)? A return of £2.30 in benefits for every pound spent sounds pretty good, if you believe the business case.
John Thornton is an independent adviser and writer on business transformation, financial management and innovation [email protected]
This opinion piece was first published in the December edition of Public Finance magazine
