HS2's East Midlands exit: Something has gone hideously wrong with HS2 - is it a real loss to Nottinghamshire?

The horse was ubiquitous in agriculture and, until being supplanted by the internal combustion engine, which were initially electric but rapidly replaced by engines run on fuel derived from oil, in the early part of the last century, seen in every town and city.

Horses, useful and loveable they may be, created a tremendous mess in their wake though it’s good for your roses or vegetable patch!

One of the reasons we use the expression ‘horsepower’ (hp) a unit of measurement of power, or the rate at which work is done when we talk about car engines is an acknowledgement of how utterly vital this animal used to be.

On 27th September 1825, passengers travelled 25 miles on the Stockton and Darlington Railway at speeds up to 15 miles per hour and began a revolutionary change in the way people and goods were able to get to destinations.

The contention that trains revolutionised Britain is something of an understatement.

If you’ve never read it, I’d recommend Christian Wolmar’s Fire and Steam: How the Railways Transformed Britain published by Atlantic Books, in which he passionately explains how the ability to travel by train revolutionised society and the way commerce operated in Britain.

One of my favourite anecdotes is that until the advent of the train, citizens of landlocked cities and towns in the middle of England, could not regularly enjoy the taste of seafood which, because of the time it taken in transit by horse-drawn carriage, would go off before it reached its destination.

Next time you tuck into a delicious cod fish ‘n’ chip supper, remember Cornish born Richard Trevithick who, on February 21st 1804, unveiled what’s acknowledged as the first full-scale working railway steam locomotive in the Welsh mining town of Merthyr Tydfil.

Being able to transport people and, of course, goods, most especially coal which used to be a major source of employment in Nottingham, became imperative for the development of railway lines by privately-owned railway companies.

This required investment who sought money from individuals sensing the opportunity to make money from what looked like a sure-fire bet.

What become known as ‘Railway Mania’ was the twenty-year period between 1825 and 1845 when over 6,000 miles were laid.

However, investors in many lines found their investment disappeared as unforeseen ground conditions and other challenges caused many companies to go bankrupt.

Building railways is a risky business and, as I’ll discuss below, estimated costs should be taken with a huge pinch of salt!

Nevertheless, railways continued to be developed and reached a peak of 23,440 miles immediately prior to first world war.

Nottingham became part of the system of railways when, in May 1839, a station was Carrington Street station allowing the Midland Counties Railway to operate a line to Derby.

British Rail, operating under the auspices of the British Transport Commission (BTC), and which existed until 1997, was created on 1st January 1948 under the Transport Act 1947 and intended to ensure a rationalised and more efficient system that had been dominated by the ‘Big Four’ of the LMS, LNER, GWR and SR resulting from the amalgamation of 120 railway companies.

Crucially, making railways more economic meant closure of loss-making lines.

Though some closures had occurred in the period 1914-1960, Dr Richard Beeching, recruited from ICI by the then Conservative Transport Minister, is synonymous with what many regarded as a savage pruning of the system.

On 27th March 1963, Beeching’s report, The Reshaping of British Railways, was published and resulted in the closure of 4,500 route miles, 2,500 stations and a loss of 67,700 jobs.

There are currently some 9,848 miles of rail line in Britain of which 39% (3,810 miles) are electrified.

Notably, 68 miles of the electrified lines are high-speed railway; the HS1 line between London’s St Pancras and the Channel Tunnel.

Operated by Southeastern and opened to international services in two sections in 2003 and 2007, HS1 allows trains to run at up to 185 mph, roughly the speed formula one cars travel at.

Costing a total of £8.64 billion, just slightly over £100 million per mile, HS1 was completed on time and under budget and delivers an estimated economic benefit well in excess of £430 million per annum meaning it’s probably reached the point of paying for itself.

So, similar to the heady optimism experienced by the early pioneers of railways, high-speed railways offered a tantalising pointer to what the future of British railways might look like.

After all, anyone who’s travelled on high-speed trains in Europe will attest to the remarkable comfort that these lines offer to passengers wanting to get to their destinations as fast as possible.

Accordingly, and buoyed the belief that what’s good for the Europeans must be good for us, in March 2010, then Labour Secretary of Transport, Lord Adonis, announced that 335 miles of high-speed line would be constructed capable of carrying trains travelling at 225 miles an hour.

For comparison, the record for the fastest train in the world is the Shanghai Maglev line in China which has reached 268 mph.

Collectively known as HS2, cities north of London, including Nottingham, would enjoy the benefits of fast transit of passengers and the economic uplift that comes with such a line.

Well, that was the initial plan.

Adonis’ undoubted enthusiasm was underpinned by the exemplar of HS1 as he claimed that the whole of the scheme would come in at a total cost of £30 billion.

Some fifteen years on, HS2 is pared down to one link between London – though it’s far from certain the intended terminus station is Euston will ever be reached – and, as widely reported, the costs have spiralled.

As investors during ‘Railway Mania’ discovered to their cost, building railways can frequently turn out to be prohibitively expensive.

Some speculated the final cost of the link between London and Birmingham may cost in excess of £100 billion.

One thing that is certain is that high speed trains won’t be arriving in the East Midlands as originally planned back in 2010.

Two years ago, then Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced at his party’s annual conference in Manchester that "the facts had changed" as far as high-speed trains were concerned and the eastern leg (HS2 East), branching off north of Birmingham, would be cancelled.

To many, especially critics of high-speed trains, Sunak’s decision has, for at least a generation, ended the dream of all major cities being linked by trains allowing travel in times comparable to using aircraft.

Local chambers of commerce in the East Midlands angrily argued that Sunak’s decision means the region is at the "bottom of the pile" in terms of transport infrastructure.

Nottingham, which can claim to be the most significant city in the East Midlands could certainly do with a far better connection between other major cities including Birmingham and London.

HS2 would certainly have achieved this.

Perhaps in the fullness of time, once the final price tag for what’s left of HS2 is accurately known, and when the Birmingham-London line is operating – unlikely to be until the end of the next decade – there’ll be far better understanding of the true value of high-speed rail travel in this country.

Then we can ask whether we really need a high-speed rail network as other countries enjoy?

We might also know exactly why it seems so difficult to build high-speed railways at a comparable cost to that achieved almost everywhere else in the world.

Though we’re no longer part of the EU, there are many I know who would consider using trains to get to European holiday destinations is they were conveniently located and, of course, sufficiently cheap.

However, even if the original 335 miles of high-speed travel envisaged by Adonis had been built, seamless travel from departure station to intended destination was never going to be possible as Euston does not link to St, Pancras from which HS1 runs.

Nonetheless, if we could get beyond the intense emotions and furore generated by the financial ‘black hole’ that HS2 has become, there must be a sensible debate about national infrastructure and the most effective and economic way to get people and goods around the country.

Love Nottingham? Us too! So sign up for our newsletter now

Perhaps then we might accept high-speed trains is a vital component of a national strategy connected to of trams and buses all of which run on fuel produced by cleaner, green, energy.

However, it’s extremely difficult to imagine any of the major political parties advocating we build more high-speed lines for a very long time.

Instead, those living in Nottingham and surrounding towns will continue to use existing lines.

However, if they have patience, and are willing to wait until well into the next decade, they’ll have the option of switching at Birmingham to HS2 though, it should be stressed, this will require a walk between New Street and Curzon Street and are not linked.

The lesson appears to be that if we really wanted high-speed travel, we need to thoroughly learn what two hundred years history of constructing railways in this country demonstrates.

That is, proceed with optimism by all means, but don’t ignore the immense challenges large infrastructure projects can unexpectedly generate meaning carefully developed plans and cost estimates become woefully inadequate.

Additionally, it might be added, don't allow politicians to use such schemes for short-term aspirations!