Source · Select Committees · Transport Committee
Recommendation 2
2
Acknowledged
Paragraph: 5
Nonetheless, there is still a need for prioritisation and hard choices, and the proposals set...
Conclusion
Nonetheless, there is still a need for prioritisation and hard choices, and the proposals set out in the Integrated Rail Plan have already left some towns and cities very disappointed. It is crucial that the Government bases its decisions on how to spend this investment on the fullest possible evidence for what will bring the greatest overall benefit to rail services, to the economy, to the environment and to communities across the North and Midlands.
Government Response Summary
The government accepts the rationale and will continue to provide updated economic assessments of HS2 at key decision points, and intends to provide a proportionate economic assessment, including BCRs, alongside other options considered in the HS2 to Leeds study.
Paragraph Reference:
5
Government Response
Acknowledged
HM Government
Acknowledged
The Government accepts the rationale for this recommendation, although again the work will take longer than the suggested timeframes. It will continue to provide updated economic assessments of HS2 at key decision points for the programme, as has been done to date. The Government intends to provide an updated economic assessment and BCR for (a) the entire committed HS2 project, though the exact timing will be determined by i) the analytical work programme needed for specific phases of the HS2 programme, and ii) the impacts of the decisions set out in the 9 March written ministerial statement to rephase the delivery ranges of parts of the project. For (b) the previous full proposals for the Eastern Leg of HS2 Phase 2b, the Government notes that the Integrated Rail Plan provided an updated economic assessment for this, including assessment of wider benefits but does intend to provide a proportionate economic assessment, including BCRs, alongside other options considered in the HS2 to Leeds Study; timing will therefore be determined by the progress of this work. In the meantime, work continues on developing a preferred route for HS2 East as outlined in the IRP, which would see HS2 trains to Nottingham and Sheffield, via Derby and Chesterfield and will consider impacts on regional economies. Economic assessments are prepared by the Department of Transport in line with Green Book and Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG). As set out in the Government’s previous response to the TSC report on Major Transport Infrastructure Projects, that appraisal framework is consistent with the concept of ‘Benefit Cost Plus’. DfT’s TAG and Value for Money Framework provide advice and tools for conducting robust and proportionate transport appraisals which are consistent with Treasury Green Book guidance and account for economic (e.g. user benefits, productivity, jobs and housing), social (e.g. physical activity, community severance, accessibility and personal affordability) and environmental impacts (e.g. noise, air quality, carbon and landscape). The Department’s Value for Money Framework sets out how impacts not captured in the BCR (for instance non-monetised impacts) should still be taken account of in the assessment of value for money. TAG also provides advice on how to estimate potential distributional impacts in scheme appraisal, to ensure that potential adverse impacts on vulnerable groups are identified. In line with the recent Green Book Review, economic analysis in transport business cases should be consistent with and support the analysis in the strategic case which evidences the investment case for the scheme. This should recognise that projects need to contribute to the Government’s strategic goals.