This week’s lead article on infrastructure spending (see page 4) comes at a time when chancellor George Osborne has faced a range of attacks on his ‘Plan A’ strategy for the economy – specifically the growth element of this programme.
It is no surprise to fi nd leading associations in the local engineering sector arguing for ‘quick wins’ to open up spending on infrastructure. But another point lends itself to further investigation – the case for ‘de-politicising’ infrastructure.
Mud has been slung from either side on the House of Commons on this issue. The reality from the sector suggests such divisions need to be set aside – and quickly.
The history of Britain’s transport network explains the politicising.
It was only in the last century that risk fell largely on the public purse to fund large-scale infrastructure projects such as High Speed Rail 2 or the entire major roads network. And with taxpayers’ cash – in the UK especially – scrutiny and argument ensues.
But, is the Government to blame? The Channel Tunnel was, and is, an immensely complex, privately-fi nanced project, involving different countries with different fi nancial and political agendas.
It required the private sector to work together in ways it is hard to imagine today.
Also, prior to the 20th century, the private sector ploughed cash into infrastructure projects, knowing it would fi nancially benefi t from the work. The contractor for the Manchester Ship Canal even took shares in the company as part of its payment for construction.
Of course, the Government needs to do more – and underwrite some projects – but maybe it’s also time for the private sector to not be so concerned with ‘ perceived risk’, accept the Government doesn’t have much cash, and take on the beefy projects.
I’m sure that’s what Mr Osborne will be dreaming about tonight.
