As can be seen from our latest blog about the rising cost of HS2, the projection of costs for infrastructure projects of this scale is no exact science. To quote Donald Rumsfeld "there are known unknowns... but there are also unknown unknowns." Projections of passenger growth and need for freight capacity as well as extent of undergrounding and detailed design development are firmly in the first category. By their very nature, the unknown unknowns remain to be seen.
What is clear, however, is that both supporters and opponents of the project are understandably, very interested in scale of public investment required to deliver a high speed rail link. This week, the controversy has been seen among the business community where there is disagreement both over whether project is needed and if so, at what cost.
On Tuesday, the Institute of Directors published the results of its survey which indicated that only 27% of its members thought HS2 represented good value for money. Director General, Simon Walker, is quoted as saying that funds could be better spent on smaller infrastructure projects which have the potential to offer significant improvements for lesser sums.
Here is another example of a known unknown: which projects may come forward over the next thirteen years (the same period to the projected running of the first high speed trains) and what would be their cumulative cost-benefit ratio?
The British Chamber of Commerce, on the other hand, have indicated their support for HS2, citing the cost of "patch-up" works as well as capacity issues on the current network. The difference between "patch-up works" and "smaller infrastructure projects" is perhaps not vast. Analysis of that known unknown is evidently needed.
The CBI remain somewhere between the two: initially supportive of HS2, it has now made clear that there are questions which need to be answered, particularly regarding the cost-benefit analysis.
One might expect differences in approach to prevail in politics but as all the major political parties back HS2, until recently this has been confined to the back benches. Cracks are starting to show, however, again over the issue of cost. Following in Lord Mandelson's footsteps, Alistair Darling has said that spending on HS2 threatens the remaining network as investment in HS2 will reduce funds available for maintenance and upgrading of existing lines.
The response from both the Department for Transport and HS2 Limited has been that HS2 will be delivered on budget. Patrick McLoughlin has made clear that recently published figures do include a large contingency, as is needed for large scale infrastructure projects (the unknown unknowns) but the aim is to deliver the railway under budget.
Perhaps the degree of conservatism in the figures and the scale of contingency contemplated are indicative of the debate within Government about the project which is no less fierce than that on the outside.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.