‘I tried to warn them, but no one listened’ – one man’s crusade against HS2
“History will not be kind to those who, if it is pursued, push through this silly scheme.”
It is not far off a decade since Lord Framlingham decided to take drastic action against HS2, the deeply troubled high-speed rail project connecting London and Birmingham.
The former commons deputy speaker staged a last-ditch attempt to kill it off in January 2017 via a fatal amendment in parliament. If Framlingham and the 26 peers who voted in favour had their way, shovels would never have entered the ground.
“Sometimes desperate situations require desperate remedies,” he argued at the time. “In this case, your Lordships are all that stand between the wishes and welfare of the people and a folly on the greatest scale imaginable.”
Fast forward to today and the cost of HS2 has reached as high as £100bn from an initial budget of £38bn (by 2009 prices), despite cancellation of the entire northern section to Manchester.
Earlier this year, MPs on the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) concluded it was a “casebook example of how not to run a project” and a risk to the UK’s reputation.
It goes further, though. Whistleblowers have come out in force alleging senior officials engaged in a massive fraud by downplaying cost forecasts to ensure Whitehall cash kept flowing in.
One, Stephen Cresswell, was recently paid more than £300,000 after a successful unfair dismissal case at the Employment Tribunal. They want a public inquiry.
Lord Framlingham is just shy of 87 years old but he shows little sign of it as we chat in one of the wood-panelled committee rooms at the House of Lords.
The old peer chuckles as he concedes tabling the so-called fatal amendment was “probably” the most significant intervention of his political career.
That’s a strong statement from a man with nearly half a century of experience in British politics.
“Traditionally the Lords don’t contradict the commons with issues like this, I was so conscious of the stupidity of [HS2] and the damage it was going to do, I couldn’t not do something about it,” he told City AM.
Unanswered questions
Spread out before us is a treasure trove of parliamentary evidence, documentation and letters – records of the many times Framlingham alerted ministers, civil servants and MPs to the risks of pushing ahead with the high-speed line.
“That’s the crucial thing – knowing all they knew, they still went ahead with this nonsense. Since then, what’s come out has shown what I and others warned about was right.”
“That’s the crucial thing – knowing all they knew, they still went ahead with this nonsense.”
His meticulous records are damning in hindsight. A dossier of expert opinion warned back in 2016 of cost overruns and why the material benefits of the scheme were negligible.
It was delivered by hand to Number 10, and then to cabinet ministers Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom and the former transport secretary, Chris Grayling.
Framlingham also held a one-to-one meeting with Boris Johnson, then foreign secretary, who he recalls soon had his “head in his hands,” letting out an almighty groan as he digested the scale of HS2’s problems.
He wrote directly to former Prime Minister Theresa May twice: “I am deeply concerned that this project may well turn out to be our poll tax. It is so nonsensical, expensive, damaging to a huge swathe of the environment and will run for years and years.”
A response, dated 19 June 2017, assured Framlingham that a reply would be sent “as soon as possible,” but he never heard back.
The written record of his parliamentary contributions is hundreds of pages long, yet much of what he – and the other rebellious peers – raised, is still being chewed over today.
The delivery of HS2’s Euston station terminus remains up in the air as ministers race to attract private investment, while a final plan for its design is yet to materialise.
Dame Bernadette Kelly, the departing civil servant who oversaw HS2, could still not provide an accurate estimate for the cost of the entire project as recently as December.
Framlingham believes it could reach as high as £300bn. “You hear people talk about the £22bn black hole, you always think when you are listening and watching the telly, HS2 is going to cost up to £300bn for nothing,” he said.
60,000 dead bodies had to be dug up
There are many forgotten details in the peer’s notes, as well.
More than 60,000 dead bodies, for instance, had to be dug up at a nearby burial ground to make way for the Euston site development – the largest exhumation in British history. Residents in the area have struggled for years amid invasive construction works, noise pollution and the demolition of key buildings.
“How saddened I am when fellow peers now tell me privately they wish they had supported my amendment,” Framlingham wrote in a memoir of events, shared with City AM.
“All I can think of when they say that is how many lives have been ruined, how much of our beautiful countryside and ancient woodland has been devastated and how many billions of pounds have been and will be thrown away for nothing.”
His view is crystal clear. HS2 will turn out to be the “country’s biggest infrastructure disaster of all time.”
What next for HS2?
Ministers and HS2’s current leadership have sought to distance themselves from the project’s past failings.
New chief executive Mark Wild, a widely-respected figure in the industry, has launched a review he hopes will begin a “fundamental reset” – a final chance to rescue the beleaguered scheme’s reputation.
City AM sat down with Framlingham ahead of the government’s spending review. He said it would be “ridiculous” if a project of its size and cost did not take centre stage in Rachel Reeves much-awaited plans.
There was no mention of it in the Chancellor’s speech to the House of Commons on Wednesday. But buried in the accompanying documents it was revealed more than £25bn had been earmarked for the project under a four-year settlement. That’s more than double all other railway investment pledges announced in the spending review.
For Framlingham, the damage is already done. He believes HS2’s primary rationale – increasing capacity – was flawed from the get go.
Critics argue expanding the existing railway network would have been the better, cheaper option, but politicians were lured in by the thought of a high-speed service.
“Some infrastructure projects go over budget but usually you end up with a bridge, with a bypass or something. With this there is no gain at all,” Framlingham claims.
In his memoir, he takes aim at Lord Andrew Adonis, the former transport secretary under Gordon Brown, who most see as HS2’s principal architect.
“I investigated the scheme’s origins and realised it was just the mad idea of one man whom nobdody has been willing to challenge,” he writes.
Adonis, who did not respond to a request for comment, has argued its problems stem from “mismangement in execution,” not from conception or design.
A spokesperson for HS2 said: “HS2 is a vital investment in Britain’s economic future and creates the foundation of a modern rail system.”
“It will provide reliable services, create capacity for more trains, cut journey times between London and Birmingham, and act as a catalyst for economic growth and job creation.
“However, Mark Wild, our Chief Executive, has been clear that HS2 faces serious cost and schedule challenges. He is now undertaking a comprehensive review which will report to the government in due course and lead to a full reset of the project to make sure it can be delivered efficiently and to the lowest possible cost.”
A government spokesperson said: “The government’s focus is the safe delivery of HS2 between the West Midlands and London Euston at the lowest reasonable cost.
“We inherited a total mess on HS2, but have taken firm action to grip it, tasking new CEO Mark Wild with delivering a complete reset of the project so that taxpayers, passengers, communities and businesses across the country continue to benefit from its transformational impact and huge economic benefits.”