Ethics is an objective, metaphysical necessity
of man’s survival.

Today, the National Audit Office publishes a report that demonstates HS1 is a financial disaster and radically confirms the doubts and fears of opponents of HS2.

The report reveals that  passenger demand has fallen far short of forecasts and government guarantees are kicking in so ”the Department is now responsible for servicing and repaying the project debt. We estimate that net taxpayer support may reach £10,200 million”.

The calculation used to justify HS1 was that transport benefits, wider economic impacts and regeneration benefits would amount to a ratio of 1.5 to 1 over costs. (Even this ratio was regarded as something of a minimum in terms of value for money.) Some of the wider impacts are unmeasurable so it was always vital that at least the transport benefits were delivered, as they can be more solidly assessed and amounted to more than 50% of all expected benefits. But actual numbers have been on average  only a third of those forecast in 1995 and only two thirds of those forecast in 1998.

The report says the Department would need to demonstrate that non-transport benefits (regeneration and other economic impacts) will have a value ”of at least £3,300 million to exceed the costs the taxpayer is likely to incur and £8,300 million to achieve the benefit-cost ratio of 1.5 to 1 originally expected from the project.” As many of these costs are unmeasurable, this is unlikely to happen. In fact no evaluation plan or tracking of benefit deliveries is yet in place, years after services started on the line. Apparently the Department of Transport is taking its time ”developing a plan to evaluate the project”.

The NAO raps the Department of Trasport’s knuckles for not reasessing the HS1′s costs and benefits since 2001 despite promising Parliament it would in 2005, significant changes in the level of taxpayer funding and Treasury guidance that projects should be evaludated when they are completed or very advanced.

In response to the report, the Department says it has improved its forecasting methodology. This is unconvincing. Much of the blame for the over-optimistic original forecasts is assigned to the unpredicted development of competition from low cost airlines. In other words, the invisible hand of the market provided a solution to the problem more quickly, at no cost to the taxpayer, that actually generates taxes rather than consumes them.

I doubt the Department’s forecasting ability has improved to the extent that it can predict similarly innovative solutions that will emerge from the markets of the future. If that was possible, the Soviet Union’s economy would have left the free world standing. Somehow, it didn’t work out like that. Nor will it with HS2.

Click for details of the present consultation

The consultation meeting yesterday about changes to local health service affecting Wycombe Hospital brought doctors making the proposals and concerned residents face to face.  That there were around 100 members of the general public present – which was significantly more than at other similar meetings in the county – and showed how high feelings are  running about the future of our hospital.

I made it clear that what local people wanted was the return of A&E and full maternity provision to Wycombe Hospital, and there was a lot of support in the hall for this.   Many people were concerned services were moving away from Wycombe, and needed clarification on just what would be treated locally and when they would have to travel to other hospitals for treatment.  

It was made clear by doctors stroke and cardiac services would remain at Wycombe, and that most other services would not be changed.  At times, the Primary Care Trust did not seem to appreciate the depth of public antagonism towards the considerable, time-consuming inconvenience of patient and visitor travel times to Aylesbury, and the despondency caused by successive waves of service withdrawals.

It is clear the PCT has not yet satisfactorily explained how its proposals will affect patients.  There is local disappointment over the closure of A&E under Labour. As a result, many residents are cynical and feel we are on a slippery slope which will see more services withdrawn in the future. They see these limited proposals as part of a longer term strategy and do not accept why a growing town the size of Wycombe does not have a General Hospital.

I believe the best way forward is to have more local accountability and control. Foundation Trust status would be an important step in the right direction and would give the people in Wycombe the chance to shape the clinical services they need and value.