Deputy condemns report as ‘misleading and dishonest’

THE co-author of the Oakervee review into HS2 has demanded his name is removed from the report.

Review deputy and co-author Lord Berkeley, a prominent critic of HS2, said he would refuse to sign off the conclusions and was considering writing his own report.

He accused the report of being ‘misleading and dishonest’.

Lord Berkeley said he has “serious problems with its lack of balance” and declared that he “cannot support its conclusions or recommendations”.

Lord Berkeley raised a series of concerns in a letter to former HS2 Ltd chairman Doug Oakervee, who was appointed by Prime Minister Boris Johnson to lead the review.

He complained about the “unquestioning acceptance of information” provided by HS2 Ltd and the “failure to scrutinise” the involvement of the Department for Transport and the Treasury in how the project was developed.

Lord Berkeley claimed there was a “trend in many of the discussions within the review to accept that HS2 will go ahead”, rather than considering the merits of other options.

He also suggested that the review should accept the cost figure of £103 billion provided by consultant Michael Byng, rather than HS2 Ltd’s latest estimate of £88 billion.

The Labour peer expects the project to provide less than £1 in benefits for every £1 spent.

“This may not be the answer that the review wants, but nevertheless it is a very likely outcome,” he wrote. “I suggest that to omit this is misleading and dishonest.”

The transport expert added that he reserves the right to publish his own “alternative report”.

The draft report warned that “large ticket price rises” will be needed to discourage peak-time travel unless HS2 is built, according to

It found that the railway could boost cities in the North and Midlands more than London due to better connections on intercity routes.

It also claimed there are no “shovel-ready” alternative schemes to raise capacity on the existing railway.