The
struggling


HS2
project
has
become
a
‘casebook
example’
of
how
not
to
run
such
a
scheme,
according
to
a
committee
of
MPs.

The
Public
Accounts
Committee,
which
has
often
criticised
the
management
of
HS2
in
the
past,
said
the
Department
for
Transport
and
government
development
company
HS2
Ltd
had
failed
to
work
together
effectively.
HS2
now
being
run
by
its
new
chief
executive
Mark
Wild,
but
he
conceded
at
the
end
of
last
year
that
‘the
programme
is
in
a
very
serious
situation
that
requires
a
fundamental
reset
to
enable
it
to
be
delivered
to
the
lowest
feasible
cost’.

The
Committee
has
also
warned
that
what
remains
of
the
HS2
project
is
now
a
‘reputational
risk’
to
the
UK,
and
is
urging
the
government
to
explain
what
taxpayers
can
now
expect
as
a
return
on
their
investment.
As
a
‘fundamental
reset’
had
been
prescribed
by
Mr
Wild,
the
Committee
said
it
would
be
seeking
details
of
how
improvements
will
be
made.

However,
it
continues
that
‘neither
DfT
nor
HS2
Ltd
currently
have
the
skills
or
capabilities
to
make
a
success
of
the
programme’,
noting
that
gaps
have
emerged
in
the
past
concerning
such
things
as
risk
management
and
assurance,
project
management
and
project
controls.

It
says
it
is
‘not
convinced
that
DfT
has
sufficiently
considered
how
it
can
bring
fresh
thinking
to
its
own
leadership
of
HS2,
or
whether
it
has
the
right
skills
and
capabilitie
to
lead
the
programme
effectively
and
credibly’.

Other
unresolved
matters
include
the
plight
of
people
who
have
been
affected
by
the
acquisition
of
their
property.
The
Committee
says
people
may
welcome
the
opportunity
to
buy
it
back,
but
they
have
been
waiting
for
answers
‘for
years’.
The
report
calls
for
such
cases
to
be
addressed
‘sympathetically
and
rapidly,
particularly
where
this
was
someone’s
home’.

Also
on
the
Committee’s
list
of
targets
are
Euston
station
and
the
now
notorious
bat
tunnel,
which
runs
for
a
kilometre
and
is
costing
£100
million,
figures
‘which
did
not
strike
the
right
balance
between
protecting
wildlife
and
the
burden
on
the
taxpayer’.
Euston
station
plans
now
depend
on
a
significant
part
being
played
by
the
private
sector,
but
the
Committee
is
‘sceptical
the
private
sector
will
come
forward
to
the
level
required.
In
the
meantime,
local
businesses,
residents
and
passengers
will
continue
to
face
significant
disruption
at
Euston
for
many
years
to
come.’

Total
costs
could
now
be
approaching
£80
billion,
and
the
report
is
pessimistic
about
the
likelihood
of
making
significant
savings.

Public
Accounts
Committee
chair
Sir
Geoffrey
Clifton-Brown
said:
‘Our
Committee
has
not
made
recommendations
in
our
report
on
delivering
better
outcomes
for
HS2’s
future
passengers.
We
are
long
past
that
point.
It
is
time
to
deal
with
HS2
as
what
it
is
–
a
cautionary
tale
that
should
be
studied
by
future
Governments
in
how
not
to
run
a
major
project.
We
are
sceptical
of
Government’s
ability
to
successfully
deliver
even
a
curtailed
scheme,
one
which
we
already
know
will
on
its
face
bring
very
poor
value
for
money.
The
question
has
instead
become:
what
possible
benefit
can
the
Government
now
salvage
for
the
taxpayer,
from
a
mess
that
presents
real
risks
to
the
UK’s
overall
reputation?

‘The
Government
must
now
look
to
future,
and
deliver
on
its
responsibilities
to
Parliament
and
the
wider
public
–
through
the
lens
of
its
accountability
to
the
PAC.’

HS2
Ltd
said
that
Mark
Wild
agreed
with
the
Committee’s
view
that
there
had
been
a
‘failure
in
management’.
It
continued:
‘He
is
taking
decisive
action
to
get
the
project
back
on
track
at
the
lowest
feasible
cost.
His
fundamental
reset
is
critical
to
ensure
the
successful
delivery
of
HS2’s
goals
–
driving
economic
growth
and
connecting
our
biggest
cities
with
fast
and
reliable
journeys.’

The
High
Speed
Rail
Group,
which
represents
suppliers,
said
the
report
identified
‘the
damaging
consequences
of
government
interventions
of
the
last
two
years.
Each
and
every
change
in
scope
has
added
to
the
delays
and
costs.’

The
DfT
has
responded
to
the
report
by
saying:
‘The
continuously
climbing
costs
of
HS2
are
completely
unacceptable.
That
is
why
the
government
acted
swiftly
to
get
the
project
back
under
control
by
bringing
new
leadership
to
HS2
Ltd,
directing
the
company
to
begin
work
on
resetting
culture,
schedule
and
costs,
and
reinstating
robust
ministerial
oversight.’

Do
you
have
a
comment
on
this
story?
Please
click here  to
send
an
email
to
Platform
at
Railnews.

Moderated
comments
will
be
published
on
this
site,
and
may
also
be
used
in
the
next
print
edition.