This is a well made argument for more devolution of transport infrastructure. In the UK, the bigger the project the more costs seem to overrun and in the case of HS2, projects do not deliver the outcomes sought in the first place. I think equally important is a steady drip of funding and improvements - One of the major issues with infrastructure in England id the stop start nature of projects.
Worth noting Scotland has a committed rolling electrification program; this isn't just about it being devolved its the devolved government making a good choice on rail policy. England could easily follow suit and map out a long-term rolling electrification program to help bring costs down
The English and Welsh railways have tried to align infra management at the route level and at the TOC level for ages, but outside Southwest trains they just don't line up very well. Scotland has a natural geography which aligns Scotrail and Network Rail, so not sure its just down to devolution politically, there's a geographic advantage too.
You overlooked the Scottish Ferry debacle five years and four times over budget! Anyhow Scotland has set a goal to decarbonise its railways and as a result it provides enough budget to keep the electrification teams gainfully employed. That said its in danger of losing its way as it presses on with electrifying lines but has no rolling stock to run under the wires. This is because its adopting discontinuous electrification and now needs specialist rolling stock which it has yet to order. So we will have those assets in place but not see a train till the early 2030s now. This isnt a sensible use of public funds.
This is a well made argument for more devolution of transport infrastructure. In the UK, the bigger the project the more costs seem to overrun and in the case of HS2, projects do not deliver the outcomes sought in the first place. I think equally important is a steady drip of funding and improvements - One of the major issues with infrastructure in England id the stop start nature of projects.
Worth noting Scotland has a committed rolling electrification program; this isn't just about it being devolved its the devolved government making a good choice on rail policy. England could easily follow suit and map out a long-term rolling electrification program to help bring costs down
The English and Welsh railways have tried to align infra management at the route level and at the TOC level for ages, but outside Southwest trains they just don't line up very well. Scotland has a natural geography which aligns Scotrail and Network Rail, so not sure its just down to devolution politically, there's a geographic advantage too.
You overlooked the Scottish Ferry debacle five years and four times over budget! Anyhow Scotland has set a goal to decarbonise its railways and as a result it provides enough budget to keep the electrification teams gainfully employed. That said its in danger of losing its way as it presses on with electrifying lines but has no rolling stock to run under the wires. This is because its adopting discontinuous electrification and now needs specialist rolling stock which it has yet to order. So we will have those assets in place but not see a train till the early 2030s now. This isnt a sensible use of public funds.
Maybe Scottish projects use few consultants who are are paid less than English ones?
Another factor might be that Scotland only has single tier unitary local gov rather than the district/county distinction