The Impact of HS2 Continues to Grow

Today’s post focuses on the HS2 rail system that is being developed in the UK, with the aim of linking some its major cities together more than ever before. We have discussed the HS2 project before here in Financial Regulation Matters, with a guest post from Teny Kuti here and an earlier post here. However, whilst the title of the post suggests that the impact of the project continues to ‘grow’, it is this concept of ‘growth’ that is the focus of the post – the environmental damage of the project is continuing to develop at an alarming pace and as recent news suggests, this project will leave a lasting mark on the British environment. This will lead us to question whether there is anything that can outrank money and its creation, as the project continues to demonstrate everything that is negative about that concept.

Speaking in October last year, a spokesperson for the HS2 Ltd Company, which is government-owned, stated that ‘we’re designing a railway that will reshape the economic geography of the whole country, as well as transforming the way we choose to travel for work and leisure… local authorities and businesses are putting plans in place… that will see hundreds of thousands of jobs created’. However, the reality presents a different picture, even if we consider the lens with which the HS2 Company insists on using i.e. a purely economic lens.

The Company, in a report at the end of last year, stated that there would be a number of impacts, both in terms of economic and environmental-related issues. Economically, the report states that there would be an estimated 19,590 jobs relocated as part of the project, with 2,380 jobs lost permanently. The Company attempt to offset this against the stated figure concerning job creation, which the Report suggests would be 2,340 permanent jobs created. Only last week the Company reported that they are currently supporting over 9000 jobs associated with the project, which is no doubt a pleasing statistic for the Company and its job-creation mantra. Yet, there are other statistics that present the hugely impactful nature of such a project.

The report stated that there would be 1740 buildings demolished by the end of the project, including 888 homes, 985 businesses, and 27 community facilities. Additionally, the report concedes that there will be a number of ‘adverse’ health effects for those affected by the development, including increased levels of anxiety and stress from “uncertainty and lack of control”. However, whilst those figures suggest that the impact would be incredibly impactful in a negative manner, the environmental impact is remarkable. This truly remarkable admission is made even worse when we consider the wider environmental effects of the project. It is reported that the project will produce 58 million tonnes of landfill – four times the total waste sent to landfill in the UK annually – and will lead to the diversion of 9 rivers, creating a massive impact on the biodiversity of those rivers. This is bad enough of course, but it was also reported last year that 16.7 hectares of ancient woodland would be lost, almost double the estimate of environmental groups prior to the project starting. Yet, last week, the sentiment of the project was further demonstrated when it was revealed that the 89,000 trees that were planted in response to the projected loss had suffered a 38% loss rate – the Company blamed the drought in the summer of 2018 for the high rate of loss. The reasoning behind planting new trees and not preserving older trees was that ‘putting in new plants was cheaper than keeping the old ones alive’. Ecologists have stated that ‘no amount of tree planting can ever make up for the loss of this precious habitat’, whilst the Wildlife Trust stated that the project ‘will result in an unacceptable level of damage to wildlife along the route’. Considering that wildlife in Britain is under an ever-increasing threat, with the appalling usage of netting over hedgerows and trees being just one callous example, the impact of the project is already in the category of inexcusable.

Interestingly, the excuse given is one based upon economics, and this has been noted. The pressure group Stop HS2 stated that the project’s developers (and by proxy the Government) do not care about people, employment, or the environment, but that ‘it is absolutely clear HS2 Ltd has gone for the most destructive, least cost option’. This is confirmed by the commissioning of investigations into how to reduce the costs of the project, and also concessions by the project’s leaders that HS2 may have to run fewer trains that projected, and at a slower speed. Not only does this negate the whole purpose of the project, but the fact that the project is right on course for being the ‘most expensive railway on Earth at £403 million a mile’ means that all this destruction associated with the project is coming at a massive economic cost, not just a social and environmental one. Given that the sole justification for the project was economic benefit, the lack of justice with this project is palpable.

There are a number of gallant pressure groups and protestors working diligently against this project, and whilst it will not be stopped they deserve support in their efforts to mitigate the disaster that the project is. It can be put in the category of failed garden bridges and bogus ferry contracts, but whilst those ludicrous Governmental displays of apathy cost the taxpayer £100 million combined (or thereabouts), HS2’s cost to the British society is incomparable. Not only will the project cost more than any other railway on the planet, and not only will it have a very limited effect upon the efficiency of rail travel in the UK (and also probably not even connect the North to the South properly), but it will fundamentally change the British environment, and that is unacceptable. To fail economically is remarkable given that economics was the project’s saving grace, but to fail environmentally is a stain on the project’s legacy, even before it is completed. It is too late to stop the project of course, but it is hoped that the environmental and social damage the project will cause may be capped somehow – however, the chances of that happening are not great at all. It is just another example of money-first politics irrespective of the damage caused.


Keywords – HS2, Railways, environment, politics, business, @finregmatters

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lloyds Bank and the PPI Scandal: The Premature ‘Out of the Woods’ Rhetoric

Image
Today’s very short post focuses upon the news that the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has recently extended the deadline to claim compensation for mis-sold ‘Payment Protection Insurance’ (PPI). Whilst a lot of financial institutions will have to prepare to offset the extended deadline, it is Lloyds that has grabbed the business headlines by apportioning an extra £350 million to offset any further claims that may be made of it – however, this comes only a week or two after the Bank posted its best performance figures in over a decade, as was previously discussed in Financial Regulation Matters . This post will therefore argue that the rhetoric being advanced recently regarding Lloyds – rhetoric like Lloyds represents ‘ a modern day success story ’ is wide of the mark and creates a false sense of security that we simply cannot afford to believe in. The ‘ robust recovery ’ was heralded far and wide upon the publication of Lloyds Bank’s financial performance for the previous fi...
Read more

The Analytical Credit Rating Agency: A New Entrant That Will Further Enhance Russia’s Isolation

Image
This short post is based upon a forthcoming article by this author that examines the viability of the latest entrant into the credit rating arena, the Analytical Credit Rating Agency (ACRA). The article, which is due to be published in the European Company Law Journal (and is available here in a pre-published version), looks at the chances of the ACRA succeeding when viewed within the parameters of perception , an aspect that underpins the credit rating sector. For this post, the focus will be upon introducing the ACRA, and then on examining the effect it may have upon the wider political issues affecting the Russian Federation. The Analytical Credit Rating Agency was established in November 2015 and comprises of 27 major Russian companies and financial institutions that serve as its shareholders. The agency, which became the first rating agency to receive accreditation from the Russian Central Bank under the new N 222-FZ Law which was designed to protect investors, has a re...
Read more

British McDonald’s Workers To Go On Strike: The Enduring Legacy of Corporate Greed and Political Irresponsibility

Image
Today’s post reacts to the news that next week, in the UK, workers will make history by staging a strike at two McDonald’s restaurants – one in London and one in Cambridge. The first strike of its kind in McDonald’s British history is a result of poor working conditions, the use of the infamous ‘zero-hour’ contracts, and a demand for an increase in the minimum wage paid to McDonald’s employees. In this post this particular story will be used a vehicle to cover an aspect that has almost become accepted in the mainstream media, unfortunately, and that is the concept of austerity and its repulsive effects. Whilst onlookers hope that the strike will see a revolution-of-sorts amongst the fast-food industry with regards to working conditions, the reality it is that the underlying causes of the grievances aired by the staff will remain whatever the outcome of the strike, as the problem is a systemic problem. The proposed strike, which is scheduled to take place on Monday 4 th Septembe...
Read more