Fast rail link plan for two new city stations

NEW train stations would be built in Edinburgh and Glasgow city centres as part of a £34 billion, high-speed rail link taking passengers from Scotland to London in just over two hours.

The project, which has a target completion date of 2030, aims to revolutionise UK travel, with European-style, double-decker trains that can travel at 200mph.

But the plans require a high-speed track to be laid and new stations large enough to cope with the rolling stock, raising the prospect of years of disruption in Scotland's two main cities.

It has also emerged Labour ministers are planning to call the new link "the Union Railway", a move that has sparked a political row in Scotland.

The name, intended to celebrate the political partnership that has linked Scotland and England for more than 300 years, irritated Nationalists who slated the UK government for politicising the project by making it an overt symbol of the Union.

Senior Labour figures have suggested "the Union Railway" is a suitable name for the High-Speed Rail Line (HSR), and The Scotsman understands their proposal has been discussed at Whitehall and is being actively considered by Transport Secretary Lord Adonis.

Read Paul Tetlaw's analysis of this story here

Tom Harris, the Glasgow South Labour MP and a former transport minister, said: "There would be no better physical symbol of the link between Scotland and England than a state-of-the-art railway that will carry millions of Scots south of the Border and millions of English people north of the Border.

"I think it would be a very powerful symbol of what has been a highly successful partnership and it will be difficult to argue against calling it that."

But Nationalists described the name as "silly". Bill Wilson, an SNP MSP for the West of Scotland, said: "There are a lot of names that I would prefer. How about the 'two nations railway', or the 'independence railway'? I think this is somebody being silly and it seems a bit provocative to pick such a political name when there are other names that would be less controversial."

Network Rail, the organisation that owns and runs Britain's railways, revealed the plan yesterday and said the new Scottish stations were likely to be close to Waverley in Edinburgh and Glasgow's Central Station, so they were near the existing transport system.

Although Network Rail did not rule out upgrading existing stations, it said it would be reluctant to do so, due to the chaos that installing the 400-metre platforms required for the huge trains would cause to timetables in the ten years it would take to plan and build the line. But finding the space in either city centre to accommodate a new station, as well as the tracks leading to them, could be a major hurdle.

Before the proposed name was revealed, the project had received a warm welcome from Scotland's transport minister Stewart Stevenson, who said he "looked forward to working with the UK government on the development of a UK-wide network of high speed services".

But he emphasised it was vital that the line continued north to Scotland and that the 54 ten-carriage trains and 20 five-carriage trains did not stop in England.

Under Network Rail's plans, construction would start in London, with the first phase of the line heading north to Birmingham. In later years, it would continue to Warrington, Liverpool and Preston, before a junction in Lanarkshire that would mean trains going to either Glasgow or Edinburgh.

But Scottish politicians and business leaders have said work should start at both ends simultaneously to ensure Scots do not lose out.

Alistair Watson, chairman of Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, said Scotland must be given "equal priority" in building the new network. "High speed proposals that take us from London to Birmingham by 2020 are not good enough," he said. "In fact, proceeding with those plans will seriously disadvantage the Scottish economy."

Network Rail said the new line was required to ease the pressure on Britain's railways. It said passenger numbers had rocketed by 40 per cent over the past decade, and that by 2024, many existing lines would be at full capacity.

The Victorian railway system is not wide enough to cope with modern, high-speed trains, so the plans include building new stations at all stops on the line, including a new terminus in central London. Network Rail acknowledged that building a new London station would present a "major challenge".

Under its proposals, journey times would be reduced to two hours 16 minutes between Glasgow and London and two hours nine minutes between Edinburgh and London – significantly shorter than previous high-speed rail estimates.

Some of the multi-billion-pound package required would have to come from the public purse, although it is envisaged that a consortium of private companies could be created to ensure that the project comes to fruition.

The scheme needs approval from the UK government, which has already set up its own HSR study, High Speed Two, which is examining a similar rail link from London to Birmingham and then on to Scotland.

Lord Adonis said the government would take full account of Network Rail's proposal, adding that it "made a powerful case for high-speed rail in Britain".

The new line would have the support of the Conservatives, if, as expected, they beat Labour at the next election.

Shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers said: "We welcome (Network Rail's] report and the research it contains on the massive potential benefits high-speed rail could deliver.

"Today's announcement provides further evidence that we need to take high-speed rail to the north. Unlike Labour, our high-speed rail ambitions go north of Birmingham and we call on the government to match our commitment."

Environmental campaigners said the new service would cut down on the pollution caused by the 100 short-haul flights that take place every day between Scottish airports and London.

If it gets the go-ahead, National Rail has forecast that it would take up to five years to sort out the exact line of the route and complete the planning work, including that involving the new stations.

Taxpayers likely to foot a large chunk of 34bn bill

FUNDING the most ambitious rail project in Britain for decades will require substantial backing from the government in addition to private sector cash, Network Rail said yesterday.

"There will definitely have to be government funding whether that's for the whole scheme or at the very least guaranteeing the scheme," said Chris Mitchell of Network Rail. "National Rail is not vying to build this, but a project on this scale would have to be publicly funded."

The most likely option would be a funding model similar to the consortium that came together to build the London to Folkestone High Speed One.

High Speed One was built by London and Continental Railways, a group that raised the 5.2 billion to construct 68 miles of track. The money raised by LCR, which consisted of National Express, SNCF, EDF Energy, Rail Link Engineering and UBS, was guaranteed by the UK government.

But the sheer size of the 34bn Scotland to London high-speed link suggests that money would have to come directly from government. It would have to be decided how much the cost would be divided between the Holyrood and Westminster budgets.

Over the next 60 years, National Rail estimated that the rail link would generate 55bn, thus paying for itself 1.8 times over. The 55bn would come from passengers paying for tickets and the benefits to the economy that would come from the time saved by the shorter journey times.

Reducing the return journey time between London and Scotland would increase rail users' productivity at work and result in more money being injected into the economy.

Ticket prices are likely to be worked out on the basis that passengers will pay a 30 per cent premium on top of the standard fare in order to take the high speed train.

At today's prices, a standard return fare between Edinburgh and London is 108, suggesting that the high-speed option, if available today, would cost 140.