Sunak cancels Manchester HS2 branch: Why can't the UK improve infrastructure?

Photo Courtesy: Hitachi Rail New HS2 train design image

The previously dormant Euston HS2 development that dominates the area surrounding UCL’s Bloomsbury campus has awoken. Rishi Sunak has finally put an end to all debate and speculation by cancelling HS2’s second branch from Birmingham to Manchester. The uncertainty surrounding the landscape near our university, and whether private investors will choose to invest, serves as the perfect microcosm for the mass uncertainty Sunak’s decision has produced in our political landscape.

There is no doubt that we are dealing with a failure of titanic proportions here. HS2 was initially proposed in 2009 as a landmark infrastructure megaproject to transform the UK’s railways and bring greater connectivity between London and the north. Instead, a landmark tragedy for infrastructure in the UK is what has ensued after 14 years and six prime ministers. We can, and should, point fingers at individuals involved, as they are undeniably guilty of negligence and inefficiency. These failures, however, extend beyond individuals and beyond the HS2 megaproject: they are symptomatic of larger systemic issues that plague the UK's approach to infrastructure development.

At the core of the issue here is that the very idea of megaprojects themselves seem to possess an inherent allergy to significant infrastructural progress. Megaprojects, categorised as a singular infrastructure project above the budget of $1bn, are fundamentally counterproductive. These colossal endeavours, with their propensity for delays, budget overruns, and supply chain issues, are essentially too colossal for their own good. It appears that the alternative of smaller, pragmatic projects is an obvious one. However, this continues to be overlooked for one reason - politics.

Professor Bent Flyvbjerg at Oxford University has likened megaprojects such as HS2 to ‘monuments’, implying that they are utilised as political tools to gain votes and support in the short-term, and so lack any long-term plan. Only 2.8% of megaprojects finish both on budget and on time, yet our politicians leverage these ventures for legacy. Whether this is out of dishonesty or delusion, it is apparent that if political expediency wasn’t prioritised over genuine, cohesive strategy, the UK’s railways would not be stuck in the 20th century.

An absence of long-term thinking and strategy has unfortunately become synonymous with British politics. A direct result of an obsessive preoccupation with political survival taking precedence over proper policymaking, this is summarised perfectly through rapid ministerial change, where the Cabinet Office has turned into a revolving door. Since HS2’s original announcement, there have been nine transport secretaries, making for an average of one every year and a half. In which other profession would there be any expectation of successful project completion if the project manager was chopped and changed so regularly?

There remains more blatant issues with UK infrastructure. The UK's intricate regulatory framework, dating back to the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947, grants substantial power to local councils, frequently resulting in bureaucratic setbacks, and making rapid progress virtually impossible. Further, the impact of austerity measures, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, offer an existential threat to significant UK infrastructure projects, which often find themselves deprioritised in a vicious cycle where delays further compound costs, which compound further delays.

This grim reality casts a shadow over the nation's infrastructure ambitions. HS2's cancellation and the larger systemic issues it symbolises jeopardise the ‘Levelling Up’ and ‘Building Back Better’ tropes that the Conservatives have championed. Regions that once held hope for revitalisation now languish in uncertainty, eroding public trust in government initiatives for regional development. Looking ahead, this government, or the next, must face the challenge of reconciling its grand infrastructure ambitions with the systemic issues that have shackled them, all while contending with an uncertain and bleak future.