HS2 in Hansard 31/03/2014

High Speed 2 Railway Line

Mr O’Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for
Transport (1) with reference to HS2 Plus published on
17 March 2014, on what basis he has decided that the
North’s integrated station should be Crewe; and what
alternative locations were considered; [193260]
(2) if he will consider rerouting High Speed 2 phase 2
through Stoke-on-Trent rather than Crewe as part of
his consideration of the public responses to his
Department’s consultation. [193262]

Mr Goodwill: We have received over 10,000 responses
to the Phase Two consultation. These are still being
analysed and considered, and no decisions on the Phase
Two route have been taken. We are considering the
recommendation on Crewe as part of our response to
the Phase Two consultation which will include analysis
and consideration of the proposals to reroute the line
through Stoke-on-Trent, as well as all other responses
to the consultation. I will respond to the consultation
on Phase Two later this year.
Mr O’Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport
whether there will be a review of the cost-benefit analysis
of High Speed 2 following the decision to revise the
High Speed 2 and High Speed 1 link. [193263]
Mr Goodwill: We will continue to revise and update
the economic case for HS2 as new project milestones
are reached, such as decisions on the preferred route for
Phase 2, to ensure it is based on the best available
evidence and latest understanding of the project, including
taking account of the decision to remove the existing
proposals for the HS1-HS2 link from the scheme.
Mr O’Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport
what estimate he has made of how much more tickets
for journeys on High Speed 2 will cost than for journeys
on conventional trains; and how the cost of tickets for
journeys on High Speed 2 will be calculated. [193264]
Mr Goodwill: The strategic case for HS2 assumes that
fares are similarly priced between services that operate
on and off the HS2 infrastructure. However, the key
decisions on fares and services on HS2 once services
open in 2026 will be taken by future Governments, as
part of determining wider rail policy for the GB rail
network as a whole.
Mr O’Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for
Transport pursuant to the answer of 28 February 2014,
Official Report, columns 511-2W, on High Speed 2
railway line, at what URL the March 2012 reports of
HS2 Ltd are published; and on what pages of those
reports the evidence that led to the decision to route via
Crewe rather than Stoke-on-Trent is set out. [193269]
Mr Goodwill: The March 2012 report setting out the
options that HS2 Ltd considered for Phase Two, and
describing the process of analysing and refining them,
The information relating to Stoke-on-Trent is in
section 4.3 (pages 34 to 69).
Further information can also be found in the ’HS2
Phase Two Engineering Options ReportWest Midlands
to Manchester (parts 1 and 2)’ at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-phase-two-engineering-options-report-west-midlands-to-manchester
Section 7 in part 2 of the report sets out the history of
line of route options studied (pages 279 to 283).
Responses to the Phase Two consultation are being
considered currently and no decisions have yet been
taken on the route. We will make an announcement in
the autumn.
Mr O’Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport
pursuant to the answer of 28 February 2014, Official
Report, columns 511-2W, on High Speed 2 railway line,
what calculationswere done to demonstrate that alternative
schemeswould fail to deliver sufficient additional capacity;
and what the passenger load factor of High Speed 2 will
be as against the passenger load factor of longer trains.
[193270]
Mr Goodwill: Since 2009 we have considered a wide
range of alternative options to a high speed railway
including the use of alternative modes, a conventional speed
line and upgrades to the existing rail network. The
alternatives do not release capacity for commuter and
freight services, fail to offer a robust solution to the problem
of poor service performance and would significantly
disrupt services as upgrade work is carried out.
All of the calculations to demonstrate that alternative
schemes would fail to deliver as much capacity as HS2
to address future levels of over-crowding have been
published. These are summarised in the Strategic Case
for HS2 released in October 2013
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-strategic-case
From the October 2013 economic case, and for the
standard case run, the average all-day load factor for
HS2 services in 2036 for the full network is 41%, and
accordingly higher during peak periods. Equivalent data
for the alternatives has been published in the HS2
Strategic Alternatives Final Report (Atkins, 2013)
http://assets.hs2.org.uk/sites/default/files/inserts/S%26A%201_Economic%20case_0.pdf
Mr O’Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for
Transport pursuant to the answer of 27 February 2014,
Official Report, column 455W, on High Speed 2 railway
line, on what basis it has been calculated that the
(a) expense of and (b) disruption caused by adopting
double-decker carriages on the West Coast Main Line
would be greater than that of the construction of High
Speed 2. [193271]
Mr Goodwill: Since 2009 we have considered a wide
range of alternative options to a high speed railway
including the use of alternative modes, a conventional
407W Written Answers 31 MARCH 2014 Written Answers 408W
speed line and upgrades to the existing rail network.
The alternatives do not release capacity for commuter
and freight services, fail to offer a robust solution to the
problem of poor performance and would significantly
disrupt services as upgrade work is carried out.
The March 2010 High Speed 2 Strategic Alternatives
Study considered the potential for using double deck
trains on WCML as one means of enhancing capacity
on conventional rail routes between London and the
West Midlands/North West. It found that while double
decking, and the less expensive alternative of train
lengthening, would increase the number of passengers
per train there is a practical limit to the expansion of
capacity on WCML and only limited opportunity to
reduce journey times.
All of the calculations to demonstrate that alternative
schemes would fail to deliver as much capacity as HS2
to address future levels of over-crowding have been
published. These are summarised in the Strategic Case
for HS2 released in October 2013 which can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hs2-strategic-case
Before such trains could be used on the West Coast
Mainline, the route (including diversionary routes) would
need to be gauge cleared to allow sufficient space for the
trains to operate. This would involve raising all overhead
wires, raising bridges, modifying platforms on the route,
modifying station canopies, moving or raising all signal
gantries and other sign age on the route, and lowering
track in the tunnels.Work would need to be carried out
to modify existing depots or to provide new ones.
Additional works would also be required to enable line
speeds to be maintained on the route.
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for
Transport what assessment he has made of the effect of
a regional transport hub at Crewe on the proposal by
Warrington Borough Council for an alternative route
for the High Speed 2 line north of Crewe; and if he will
make a statement. [193627]
Mr Goodwill: HS2 Ltd will undertake work to consider
proposals for a hub station at Crewe as part of the
consideration of the responses to the Phase Two
consultation. This closed on 31 January and all responses,
including that from Warrington Borough Council, are
currently being considered. No decisions have yet been
taken on the route but we will make an announcement
on this in the autumn.
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport
what assessment his Department has made of the potential
economic benefits to (a) the North-West and (b)
Warrington of further upgrading the West-East line as
proposed in the HS2 Plus Report. [193697]
Mr Goodwill: No specific assessment has yet been
made. In response to the HS2 Plus report, we have
commissioned HS2 Ltd and Network Rail to undertake
work to allow proposals to accelerate construction of
the Crewe section of HS2 Phase Two and to build a new
integrated hub station at Crewe to be looked at in detail
as part of the consideration of the public consultation
responses to Phase Two. We have also commissioned
HS2 Ltd and Network Rail to make recommendations
on enhancing connectivity in the midlands and the
north before our response to the Phase Two consultation.
Mr Jamie Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for
Transport (1) what the proposed service pattern is for
classic-compatible High Speed 2 trains serving Carlisle
when (a) High Speed 2 phase 1 and (b) High Speed 2
phase 2 opens; [193890]
(2) what plans he has for Penrith North Lakes,
Oxenholme Lake District and Lancaster to be served
by classic-compatible High Speed 2 trains. [193891]
Mr Goodwill: HS2 will provide a very significant
expansion of the rail network’s ability to carry passengers
and freight, resulting in improvements to rail services
throughout the country. It is too soon to set a final train
timetable at this stage, but HS2 Ltd and Network Rail
have begun a process which will allow us to identify the
best possible use of the post-HS2 rail network.
One set of assumptions, amongst many, has been
developed for business case modelling purposes. These
assumptions are clearly set out in “The Economic Case
for HS2: Assumptions Report” published in October
2013
http://assets.hs2.org.uk/sites/default/files/inserts/SA%2020_PFM%20assumptions%20report_V3_0.pdf

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/chan145.pdf

Advertisements