Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Comment | We should embrace Chinese input

Mark Hansford

Chancellor George Osborne’s decision to choose his trip to China to fire the starting gun for bids to win £11.8bn worth of High Speed 2 (HS2) civils construction contracts back home was an interesting one.

Chiefly done as a none-too-subtle attempt to get Chinese investors interested in part-funding the scheme, you sense it was also intended to provoke the still far from perfect UK construction industry.

Osborne and his fellow ministers are surely still more than a little aggrieved at being forced to scale back the government’s rail electrification programme earlier this year, and maybe the move to let the Chinese hear the HS2 news first and first-hand was a heavy hint that there are others out there who can step up and step in.

All new HS2 tracks at Euston built lower than the existing tracks allowing the concourse to remain at ground level and easy access through the station.

Certainly some of the industry response suggests that threat has been inferred. First out of the trap was the High Speed Rail Industry Leaders (HSRIL), a loose group of mainly UK-based consultants and contractors with big rail teams. It was keen to stress that the industry understood the responsibility to deliver and that it was “ready, willing and able to do so.”

Similarly keen to push UK interests was the Association for Consultancy and Engineering (ACE). Its chief executive Nelson Ogunshakin rightly highlighted the experience gained by UK-based consultants on projects such as London 2012, the Birmingham New Street Station remodelling and Crossrail. The ACE also warned the chancellor that in his “rush” to secure foreign investment, he “risks undermining the ability of UK firms to benefit from the work”.

“We must ensure that UK engineering companies do not miss out on what would be an outstanding opportunity to develop the skills of its workforce, increase their expertise, and export what they have learnt to the global market,” said Ogunshakin.

That is certainly one view. Interestingly the ICE has taken a slightly different one. It used Osborne’s fundraising tour of China to announce its own Chinese relations building programme: an employee exchange scheme agreement with the China International Contractors Association.

The agreement, signed in the presence of Osborne and commercial secretary to the Treasury Lord O’Neill, will kick off gently with Mott MacDonald taking an employee from China Railway Construction Company (CRCC) into its Manchester office next month for a three month placement.

More will follow in what is most certainly not going to be a one-way information exchange. Yes, China has a huge infrastructure programme itself and there is much I am sure its engineers can learn from the UK - particularly around safety for which the UK (on major projects at least) has a comparatively enviable record. But there is also much the UK can learn from China around major project delivery.

That’s the message from the ICE - and it’s a good one. We - the UK - aren’t world leaders in high speed rail delivery. We just can’t be - we haven’t delivered a high speed line for over a decade. So we need to learn from others, and working collaboratively from the start has to be the way forward.

  • Mark Hansford is NCE’s editor

Readers' comments (2)

  • How did those nations who are "world leaders" in high speed rail get there? Their governments invested in local engineers & built up their own countries business & skills.
    Our politicians do not support UK engineers and industry in general.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • European investors would be more likely to be interested if UK had a long term infrastructure strategy, not one that changes every time there's an election. And certainly one that's based on engineering logic and planning and not accountants' short term spending whims. The current HS2 predicament is one of governments own making and a failure to promote a unified and cohesive delivery strategy and is another example of why UK infrastructure planning needs a long-term delivery strategy for ALL projects, not just party favourites-of-the-moment.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.