A PLANNED £32 billion high-speed rail line which may eventually be extended to reach Scotland was yesterday rubbished as "economically flawed".
The right-wing Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) criticised the High Speed 2 scheme - which would initially run from London to northern England and is backed by the major parties - as a "political vanity project" and based on "bogus assumptions".
A report by the institute said the line was not commercially viable and would cost taxpayers £1,000 each.
It was written by Kyn Aizlewood, who has campaigned against the impact of the line on his village in the Midlands, and Dr Richard Wellings, the institute's deputy editorial director.
The line is due to reach Birmingham in 2026, with a Y shape north to Manchester and Leeds in 2032-33. It has not been confirmed when the line would be extended to reach Scotland.
The IEA report said UK government estimates of passenger demand were very optimistic, claiming that significant environmental and social costs had not been included in the economic case - with several areas likely to be affected by planning blight.
The report also questioned the "green" credentials of the scheme. It said the 225mph trains would be the fastest in Europe and consume disproportionate levels of power. It added that claims the HS2 would bridge the north-south divide and bring regeneration should be treated with scepticism as the evidence was largely speculative.
Dr Wellings said: "Proceeding with the HS2 plans is a recipe for disaster and, as always, it will be the forever-embattled British taxpayer who will end up footing the bill for this latest white elephant." However, Professor David Begg, director of the Campaign for High Speed Rail, said: "I am hugely disappointed and shocked by the IEA's analysis.
"This is a weak regurgitation of weak research carried out by the Taxpayers' Alliance, which has not stood up to public or industry scrutiny since.
"Just like them, the IEA declare that the scheme will cost £1,000 per taxpayer. This is grossly disingenuous, as it fails to account for fare revenues, private investment and generated taxation that will offset the public investment."
Prof Begg went on: "I would expect better from an otherwise reputable think-tank than to parrot misinformation and repackage the propaganda of opponents to the project."
The Department for Transport said the scheme would generate in £44bn in economic benefits. A spokesman said: "The alternative, according to the IEA, would be for the government to stop investing in the railways, close many of the railway lines that currently exist and sit on its hands as ticket prices get higher, performance deteriorates and crowding increases."