Papers and Submissions:

11 February 2020. There IS an alternative to HS2 – invest in rail in the regions to bring benefit by 2025, nearly 20 years earlier than HS2, and still save £135bn! (rh21010) Need: The Northern Region and Midlands need over £100bn of rail improvements, whether HS2 gets built or not, in order to ‘rebalance the economy’. Changing demand: Any growth in demand for rail is now for local and regional services, not for first-class intercity high-speed trains. Save £135bn: Cancel most of HS2 (incl Phases 1 and 2A) and save £135bn over 20+ years. How can a responsible government spend such sums without an up-to- date demand assessment? Jobs: Regional rail improvements create rail high tech jobs from 2022, five years earlier than HS2. Regions to own Service Specification: Allow each region to set its service specification for regional services now and allow Network Rail to start on the quick wins such as electrification. Small schemes deliver earlier benefits: Allow Network Rail to spend on small schemes, without Treasury approval which can take 9 months for a £500,000 project to resurface a station platform. Compare this with Treasury spending £10m a day on HS2, whose overspend has already reached 230%.’ 1 February 2021 - An occasional update on HS2: becoming a pointless £142bn spend! - Future demand for long distance rail travel: during a second lockdown with potentially longer effects, we still have no information from ministers on the likely demand for rail travel in the future, short medium or long term. - Swampy digging in at Euston; why do they not stop HS2 at Old Oak Common? National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) report largely supporting my views on HS2. Read - RNA Final Report. - Ministers have cut Network Rail’s enhancement budget by £1bn, suggesting that they do not see rail needing any investment to help meet our zero-carbon agenda. We build HS2 because the construction industry is in a fragile position’ Oakervee December 2020. HS2 and its construction industry at the moment seems to be wrecking the fragile countryside and around Euston. The industry would be better employed working on smaller and lower cost rail improvements as proposed by NR and the NIC Regional infrastructure pipelines show government is yet to deliver on ‘levelling up’ pledge - New Civil Engineer. Phase 2A West Midlands to Crewe ready for Royal Assent. Full document on (rh210131). 16 December 2020 - Oakervee explains why he recommended HS2 to go ahead – to support the construction industry! https://youtu.be/KEqUhmbuZ-4?t=311 At the Transport for the North online conference on 14 December, Doug Oakervee explains what drove the panel to reach its conclusions earlier this year. His revelation is shocking. Firstly he says the recommendation to the Prime Minister to go ahead with the whole of HS2 was driven by a need to get the Southern leg started as the notice to proceed was due. That in turn was driven by 4 factors: - £9billion had been spent already and the prospect for recovery was minimal. - Properties and communities along the line had been blighted for many years - The construction industry was in a fragile position and if HS2 had been cancelled it would have done tremendous harm to the construction industry and the supply chain and congestion on the west coast line between London and Rugby. In other words the first 3 of the reasons had nothing to do with the merits/demerits of HS2 as a rail project! His report of February 2020 did make the same point as item 3 above but it is just one of many other conclusions. Stripped down to its bones in December 2020 Mr Oakervee says the needs of the Construction Industry was a major driver for proceeding. 15 December 2020 - Government must now implement the National Infrastructure Commission’s Report - Rail Needs Assessment for the Midlands and the North, published today - (rh201214) The Report states that the need for rail improvements is greatest in the regions, and that therefore priority should be given to upgrades in these areas and, if the money was available, prioritsing regional links. - Tony Berkeley press release (rh201215) 27 November 2020 - Press release - A Rail network for the North by experts in the North. - (rh201120) - (rh201120) - (rh201124) Network North will enable a network of services between centres in the Northern Powerhouse region and beyond to provide a range of services to match those around London. Unlike HS2 Phase 2B, some projects are shovel ready for the expert rail construction sector – such as extending the Midland Main Line electrification, Manchester Piccadilly Castlefield Corridor improvements with upgrades to the East Coast Main Line already in progress. All they need is DfT funding to start next year. Network North aims to introduce region-wide electrification, leading to more frequent services connecting the many important centres and providing new opportunities for jobs, shopping, visiting friends and relatives etc,. 4 November 2020 - Tony Berkeley - HS2 update 3 November 2020. - (rh201103) - (rh2011043) - (rh201103) HS2 Phase 1 costs are now 5 times higher than when it was started, with no safe and approved design for Euston; and Crossrail 2, previously thought essential by DfT and TfL for HS2 passengers, ‘paused’. Demand for rail travel is still 40% below earlier this year, and DfT says it has done no assessment of future demand. So will Government ‘pause’ or cancel parts or all of HS2 to save the now overall cost of around £170 bn? 2 October 2020 - Major Projects - Is the Government a competent client? - rh200930 Veiw the full report - Report on Infrastructure Governance, The Gerrard Report, September 2020. 10 September 2020 - Letter to Andrew Stephenson MP on the Wendover tunnel option. Tony Berkeley challenges the reasons for DfT trying to close down discussion on this option on the grounds of cost (but HS2’s record on costs is questionable), on building tunnels in chalk (it is quite possible if you want to do so!) and the need or not to seek new permissions for a tunnel (there is a precedent for using the Transport and Works Act Order procedures). He concludes that ministers could do this with a positive message and no detriment to the overall project. See associated documents - (rh200902) - (rh200905) - (rh200909) - (rh200910) 5 September 2020 - Press Release - HS2 – ‘To build or not to build' - where is any commitment? Today, the Prime Minister said HS2 would ‘fire up economic growth and help rebalance opportunity…across the country for years to come.’ HS2’s Mark Thurston said ‘the reality of high speed journeys joining up Britain’s cities in the North and Midlands and using that connectivity to help level up the country has just moved a step closer’. But where is the commitment backed up by money? The most important means of rebalancing the economy is to give the North and Midlands at least the same level of commuter services that the South East enjoys. HS2 delivers very little of this……. - (rh200903) 18 August 2020 - Press release - Invest in the classic rail network rather than close it! The tragic derailment near Stonehaven last week reminds us of the increasing severity of storms and floods on our classic rail system. It follows a warning only four weeks ago from the Office of Rail Regulation about the vulnerability of Network Rail assets to landslips and severe weather. Government policy to target zero carbon by 2050 can only mean, for transport, increasing rail use and increasing investment including more electrification. Rail is by far the safest form of travel, over 1,000 times safer than road travel. So there is a strong argument for greater investment in rail, in particular on the classic lines which were generally built over 150 years ago before the extreme weather hit us so frequently. In my Dissenting Oakervee Report on HS2 (January 2020) I urged the government to prioritise local and regional lines and services in the areas served by HS2, at a cost of £128.5bn in addition to the £106bn cost of HS2. In July 2020, along with Michael Byng, I published a report on improving the rail infrastructure of the South West at a cost of £1.2bn, less than 1% of the £106bn cost of HS2. Both these reports reflect the greater need for improved local and regional rail connectivity and resilience, to encourage economic regeneration and help achieve a lower carbon transport system – something that HS2 does not do. We must also consider whether the many reports of more permanent remote working, particularly by those who were travelling longer distances by rail, will not reduce demand for longer distance rail travel to the extent that the existing intercity services could serve customers well for many years. After all, the use of laptops on longer journeys also reduces the need for world-beating speeds on our small country! However, Private Eye 1528 published last week reported that the Treasury wants to do another round of ‘Beeching’ cuts on the rail network to reduce the £700m per month it is paying to the railway to substitute the fares lost through Corona Virus lockdown, exacerbated by government advice to avoid public transport where possible. If Treasury wants to save £700m per month on the rail sector, then it could cancel or reduce the scope of HS2, saving up to £120bn, and invest, instead, on modernisation the classic regional rail infrastructure and instruct the Department for Transport Ministers to encourage and promote rail transport rather than tell people to avoid rail where possible. That is the quickest way of increasing the revenue of the railways and helping the transport sector achieve zero carbon. 14 July 2020 - Letter to Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for Railways, on the failure of Government and HS2 ltd to comply with the Development Agreement between them, and concludes: ‘From the information which I have summarised above, it would appear that these changes to the Development Agreement and continuing failure to inform Parliament in a regular and consistent basis were and are intended to mislead parliament. The May 2020 Report of the PAC makes similar strong criticism, as did my Dissenting Report on HS2 dated January 2020; it is surely time to accept in public the comments in the letter sent by S of S Patrick McLaughin MP to Chancellor George Osborne MP dated 11 May 2016 saying, and I paraphrase, ‘We cannot build HS2 for the price, but let’s keep any increase totally secret otherwise Parliament may not approve the Phase 1 Bill.‘ - (rh200714) 30 June 2020 - Royal Over-Seas League Lecture. Lord Berkeley was asked to speak on the future of rail in the UK. He recently published a dissenting report into the High Speed 2 project on January 5, calling it ‘the wrong and expensive solution’ to providing better north–south inter-city services and improving services in the Midlands and North of England. He was Deputy Chair of the Oakervee review of how and whether to proceed with HS2. To read full document - (rh200630) 16 June 2020 - Update. Letter from Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for Railways, on HS2 approaches to Euston and Old Oak Common - (rh200602) Letter Tony Berkeley to Andrew Stephenson MP, Minister for Railways on terminating HS2 at Old Oak Common - (rh200617) Jonathan Roberts, train timings approaching Old Oak Common - (rh200616) Chris Stokes, Passenger Dispersal from Old Oak Common as terminal for HS2 (dated 19 September 2019) - (rh190913) 17 May 2020 - Press release - Lord Berkeley, author of the Dissenting Report into HS2 in January of this year, welcomes the Public Accounts Committee report issued today. “I am pleased that Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has taken steps to investigate HS2, but it is clearly not enough. Unfortunately, the report has failed to take into account the even earlier warnings that I, and others, gave the Government several years previously about the cost increases, the many senior whistle blowers who were silenced, and the failures of successive ministers to properly inform Parliament. “HS2 Ltd. and those working on it at the DfT have had no regard for proper process or Parliament. As recently as last month, why did the DfT give the go ahead to begin building HS2 on 15 April 2020 when it must have known about the ongoing PAC review? It is very unlikely that Parliament would have given approval had it been provided with the necessary cost information in a timely manner.” To read the full press release - (rh200517) Press Release 17May 2020 PAC.1. To read the full - Public Accounts Committee Report. 15 April 2020 - Press Release - HS2 – the ultimate £100bn vanity project as GDP forecast to drop by 35%! Comments by Lord Berkeley on the HS2 Phase 1 Go-ahead’ ‘The Government’s giving HS2 the go-ahead at a likely cost of over £50bn flor Phase 1 just a day after the OBR suggested that the UK faced the worst recession for 100 years and a forecast drop in GDP of 35% is certainly well timed to get minimal scrutiny. ‘The accompanying DfT Full Business Case claims that HS2 will help the economy by providing shovel ready work for the construction industry, but fails to acknowledge that there are more and much cheaper rail shovel ready projects which will bring greater benefit to rail users. ‘DfT has also not explained whether the main contractors have agreed to design and build Phase 1 for the latest DfT funding envelope of £45bn, especially when ministers were already saying since March 2019 that the Phase 1 spending envelope was £55bn, similar to the more credible estimate of Michael Byng of £54.5bn quoted in my HS2 Dissenting Report. ‘The Benefits are still based on 17 trains per hour for the whole scheme into Euston, in spite of evidence from around the world that no high-speed lines operate more than 12 to 14. No prudent economist would base a business case on an operation that is not achievable in practice. Elsewhere in the Business Case, the DfT struggles to find even more ambitious benefits to attribute to HS2, including ‘higher foreign investment into the UK’ (2.11). Is t his really dependent on HS2? ‘The DfT accepts that the Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) will be affected by the current Corona Virus travel restrictions, but fails to quantify by how much and for how long. However, it reduces the BCR to 0.8 for the Funding Envelope of £40bn (Table 2.4), reducing to 0.7 for 10% less demand. Surely the lower demand is very likely as a result of Corona Virus changing demand? ‘Putting all these together, I believe that the BCR quoted in my Dissenting Report of 0.6 is much more realistic. Fig 2.1 reminds us that a BCR of over 2.0 is ‘good’ and below 1.0 is ‘poor’. ‘At a time of the Corona Virus health and business costs well exceeding those of HS2, it is surprising that ministers are still throwing more good money, our money, after bad. The NHS could clearly benefit from the £billions that could be saved for investments in the NHS and other parts of the UK economy by scrapping HS2, whilst still potentially investing in alternative and much better targeted rail projects listed below. Ministers seem to be keeping their collective heads well in the sand, whilst hoping that the lack of scrutiny due to the Coronal Virus will mean that, by the time they surface with the full knowledge of the UK’s financial situation, it will be too late to stop this unnecessary drain into what remains a massive vanity project.’ Further reading: DfT Full Business Case-High Speed 2 Phase One: (Click here to read the PDF) Tony Berkeley Dissenting Report on HS2 – See below January 2020. 5 April 2020 - Letter to PM saying that Network Rail’s need for £500m of rail construction workers shows that Oakervee was wrong to say that there were no other ‘shovel ready’ projects apart from HS2. (rh200405). Examples of Network Rail’s ‘Shovel Ready Projects’ include the four tracking of the Castlefield Corridor in Manchester which is the cause of much of the rail congestion in the area and which Network Rail reports is one of the few ‘Congested Infrastructure’ projects in the UK; Castlefield Corridor congested infrastructure report in PDF Secondly, the extension to the Midland Main Line electrification is genuinely shovel ready with the existing team soon running out of work. So why does the Department for Transport refuse these vital projects going ahead whilst spending millions on keeping HS2, and its preliminary works contractors who ignore social distances, on life support. 25 March 2020 - Letters to PM and Shapps. (rh20317). 15 March 2020 – letter to HS2 Minister Andrew Stephenson MP on Euston Station and approaches. It asks why HS2 continues to demolish buildings and structures when ministers from the PM downwards have said that HS2’s will no longer be responsible for Euston and it will be subject to a new review to integrate HS2 and Network Rail parts and reduce the overall costs. (rh200311). 10 March 2020 - Key issues arising from the Oakervee Review of HS2; Westminster Energy, Environment and Transport Forum Conference, 10 March 2020. (rh200308). 28 February 2020 – Letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer – HS2- a way forward to save £65bn. This includes the latest cost estimate of HS2 and the alternatives, with a paper ‘Connecting Britain by Rail’ by Robert Goundry, James Mackay and Jim Summers which gives more details of the alternatives providing more capacity and better services than HS2. (rh200226). 11 February 2020 - Oakervee Report published. January 2020 - Tony Berkeley Dissenting Report. A report by Deputy Chair Tony Berkeley setting out his conclusions on the evidence submitted to the Oakervee Review. It concludes that the evidence does not support a decision to proceed. (rh200105). November 2019 – Tony Berkeley’s letter of resignation to Doug Oakervee. (rh191111). August 2019 - Tony Berkeley was Deputy Chairman of the Oakervee Review of HS2. He resigned in November 2020 and published his Dissenting Report in early January 2020. August 2019 - Oakervee Review Terms of Reference. Long and detailed terms of reference for a very short 2 ½ month review. (rh190920). October 2016 - Euston Express, an alternative presented to an HS2 Phase 1 Select Committee in October 2016, provides for a cheaper, more effective and quicker-to- build alternative to HS2’s proposal which would devastate large parts of the area around Euston. Euston Express removed the need for a very deep down construction putting at risk not only the West Coast Main Line tracks into Euston but the adjacent houses, and only needed to deliver the perfection engineering of 18 trains per hour, and needing Crossrail 2 to disperse the increased number of passengers. (rh161012).

Papers and Submissions:

Gallery

Some Pictures from my history with the Rail Industy.