Margaret Hodge accuses the government of using “fragile numbers, out-of-date data and assumptions which do not reflect real life” when deciding whether to proceed with the project. The PAC say that "the business case does not include a complete cost for the impact of disruption, for example, to local businesses during construction”.
We talk about more holes being blown in the business case for HS2. The question is becoming: what's holding the holes together?
And the Welsh government has demanded £2bn in compensation because none of the money spent on HS2 would be spent in Wales, reports the FT (£):
London, when it approves spending on England-only projects, sometimes has to give sums of money – called “Barnett consequentials” – to Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales.That's how they describe it in Whitehall World.
Back on Earth this translates as: If you're going to waste billions of pounds you haven't got anyway on HS2, that entitles us to more English subsidy.
The subsidy is wrong, HS2 is wrong, blowing money we haven't got on white elephants is wrong.
They get into government, and they love the thought of spending lots of other people's money.