The cancellation of the northern leg of High Speed 2 (HS2) will result in an outcome no one wished for – an incomplete rail line that could worsen services to the North. It has also cast doubt on the UK’s ability to deliver major infrastructure projects.
The ICE has launched a Next Steps programme to understand how and why it reached this point and what lessons policymakers and practitioners can take from it.
Following discussions with key HS2 stakeholders, the ICE’s initial findings have been published in a briefing paper. It sets out several emerging points arising from the cancellation of the northern leg:
- There is a need for better corporate governance on who makes decisions, and how and when these decisions
are made - There is a need for stronger client and departmental capability – particularly on technical assurance and “owning the project”
- The contracting approach did not set the project up for best practice delivery
- Major projects and programmes require clarity and consistency on outcomes to achieve political and public buy-in
- Any programme of this scale and significance needs to spend more time in development.
A key focus of those discussions was how decisions about HS2 were made. It was significant that, despite the UK’s parliamentary system, prime minister Rishi Sunak alone could decide to cancel the northern leg.
The only constraint was how much political capital it would cost him. In this case, political support for HS2 was evaporating and public opinion was ambivalent.
The reasons for this go back to how the project was first packaged and sold. Concessions were made to gain parliamentarians’ support. This enabled the project to move forward quickly, but it meant too little attention was given to examining the need for HS2 or alternative options.
The lack of a compelling, consistent strategic story and the tactical approach to securing political buy-in meant support for HS2 was ultimately shallow. Combined with spiralling costs and the high turnover of politicians overseeing the project, the prime minister’s decision became much easier.
Improving UK infrastructure delivery is crucial
Unfortunately, the negativity has somewhat overshadowed the positive outcomes HS2 has already delivered.
Phase 1 has already shown there is impressive civil engineering and construction within the UK, equal to delivering a project of this size and scale. It has generated investment along the route, upskilled thousands of workers and pushed delivery practice forward.
Capturing the positive as well as negative lessons from HS2 is crucial because the ability to plan and deliver the right infrastructure is key to the UK’s economic, environmental and social prosperity. The government needs to reduce delivery costs, which are high by international standards. High inflation and weak economic growth have increased the pressure to deliver more at less cost.
Uncertainty also risks weakening public confidence that infrastructure investment will deliver the benefits promised. In the race to reach net zero and adapt to climate change, public engagement and support for infrastructure projects is more important than ever.
We want to hear from you
This is not the complete story behind the cancellation of HS2’s northern leg.
The briefing paper is intended to prompt constructive conversations, and we invite people to challenge what we have found so far. The ICE wants to gather further evidence from infrastructure professionals and other experts. These responses will inform an updated briefing paper to be published in the summer.
Like what you’ve read? To receive New Civil Engineer’s daily and weekly newsletters click here.