East West Rail campaign groups accuse the Department for Transport of ‘wishful thinking’

Campaigners have accused the Department for Transport (DfT) of “wishful thinking” over its claims of East West Rail-related economic growth.

They argue there have been ample chances for the DfT to prove the case for the £7billion to £8billion railway and “they still haven’t managed it”.

The comments come after the National Audit Office (NAO) said it is not clear how the EWR project will provide benefit, nor how it aligns with the government’s growth plans.

Co-founder of campaign group Cambridge Approaches William Harrold, who lives in Haslingfield, said: “Our views on EWR have been vindicated. The NAO report concludes that it is not clear how the benefits of the EWR project will be achieved or how it aligns to other government plans for growth in the region.

“If we have to supersize the Cambridge area, government needs to start from the problem and not assume that EWR is a solution or indeed the only solution.

“The impending and critical water shortage in Cambridgeshire, Milton Keynes and Bedfordshire should also be addressed first.”

Cambridge Approaches and BFARe, which represents communities in Bedford, say in a “sane world”, the EWR project “would have been scrapped long ago”.

The railway, which will connect Oxford to Cambridge via new stations at Cambourne and Tempsford, near St Neots, is intended to form a crucial part of boosting the Oxford Cambridge Arc.

However, the NAO’s investigation into the project has found that the link between EWR and economic growth is unclear. This is despite the DfT having assessed, in May 2023, that there is a strong strategic need for the project as it will help achieve economic growth in the region as there is currently poor transport connectivity.

The Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) announced, in July 2023, its intention to support the expansion of Cambridge rather than along the EWR route. DLUHC and DfT consulted a week before the announcement but the two departments are still figuring out how their plans are aligned. This work is expected to be presented ahead of the consultation on the route for EWR’s final section, which is planned to take place this year.

The NAO report was published before housing secretary Michael Gove’s announcement on December 19 that a development corporation will deliver upwards of 150,000 homes around Cambridge over the next 20 years.

A statement released by Cambridge Approaches and BFARe, which represents communities in Bedford, said: “Across the affected region – and beyond – there are major concerns about agricultural production and water supply. DEFRA is tasked with maintaining food security, and the Environment Agency (EA) has cited water shortage as grounds for objecting to five major housing development plans in the Cambridge area.

“The NAO approached neither DEFRA nor the EA in compiling their report. The inability for the government to work across departments shows that there is a failure to consider the impact of climate change on major infrastructure projects.”

“Furthermore, if housing plans are to be locally led, why are local authorities barely included [in] the EWR plans? They are critical to delivering the benefits,” they ask.

Mike Barlow, who is spokesman for BFARe, added: “For communities that have already suffered three years of project-related doubt and blight, the NAO report is frustrating, to say the least. It’s yet another example of a continuing and widespread determination to accept reality and displays a breathtaking disdain for residents.”

The NAO report also showed that the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) for EWR has fallen to a poor rating over time.

It started at 0.5 in a low housing growth scenario and 1.1 in a high housing growth scenario, but this fell even lower when the methodology for growth assumptions was updated alongside the preferred route announcement. This means the benefit of the project will be significantly less than the amount spent to build it.

However, project promoter EWR Co argues that “not all of the benefits are captured in the conventional BCR”, which the NAO also acknowledged.

Despite the EWR project having been announced in 2017 with the promise of major growth possibilities, the NAO says that work to identify growth opportunities around the new stations on the route is still at an early stage.

The campaigners conclude: “Cambridgeshire residents demand to be heard. The infrastructure cost, the route selection and the project management process must be properly investigated. Without transparency, another HS2 with spiralling costs is looming and surprisingly, EWRCo spend their time on media spin rather than properly performing their job.”

A government spokesperson said: “We have supported the National Audit Office’s review of East West Rail and will carefully consider its recommendations.

“East West Rail will serve as a catalyst for economic growth in the Oxford-Cambridge region, bringing communities closer to job opportunities, and progress is already being made to deliver the first passenger service from Oxford to Bletchley and Milton Keynes by 2025.

“As the NAO report recognises, the region’s huge economic potential is an important factor in the business case for East West Rail, and we will continue to work closely across government to ensure the full benefits of the rail investment are realised.”

A spokesperson for East West Railway Company added: “The NAO report confirms what we set out when we announced the route – that the case for EWR rests on the economic benefits that a new railway brings in terms of new businesses, jobs and investment, rather than just improved connectivity alone.

“As we’ve said, and as the NAO makes clear, not all of these benefits are captured in the conventional benefit-cost ratio (BCR), and therefore it is essential that we work closely with partners in government and locally to make sure these benefits are delivered for the communities that we serve.

“The report acknowledges that we are already doing so, but also makes clear that more needs to be done. We welcome that – and are committed to working with government to take forward the NAO’s recommendations.”