Those who say that Britain doesn’t invest in infrastructure are dead wrong. We SPEND loads, but cost bloat means we get very little for that spending.
Sam Dumitriu (@Sam_Dumitriu)
🚨NEW: Britain spends a third more on transport infrastructure than its peers, but because of high construction costs ends up with a 5th less.
Britain has a 65% cost premium compared to peers like France, Germany, and Spain. In other words, the UK needs to spend £1.65 to get what a £1 buys elsewhere.
If Britain’s cost-premium over European peers was eliminated, our £21bn of annual investment (average 2015-2023) in transport infrastructure would secure 65% more infrastructure per pound spent.
Over the course of a Parliament, Britain would, in effect, have £41.5bn more of actual transport infrastructure for the amount it already spends.
Here’s an idea of what £41.5bn could fund:
🚋Trams for Leeds, Bristol, Cardiff, Leicester, Coventry, Plymouth + a Southampton–Portsmouth line (plus 20 miles worth of extensions to existing systems): £13.1bn at £87m/ mile
🚟 190 miles of rail electrification per year: £5bn
🚅Major rail bottlenecks fixed in Manchester (Castlefield Corridor) and the South East (Croydon Area Remodelling Scheme): £12.9
🚘Major road schemes revived include dualling the A1, A120 Braintree–A12, A303, A358, Arundel Bypass, Acle Straight dualling and a Third Menai Crossing (£10.5bn)
What do you think we should fund if we eliminated the cost premium and had an extra £41.5bn to spend?
Read the full @BritainRemade /@BritishProgress paper: britainremade.co.uk/moreforl…
— https://nitter.net/Sam_Dumitriu/status/2067644097171497311#m