ONE of Scotland's biggest transport projects is no longer economically viable due to the failure of a local property boom and steep drop in projected passenger numbers, the Government has been warned.
The controversial £350 million Borders Railway has suffered from the failure of plans to build hundreds of houses along the route and a fall in the predicted number of people making return trips from 976,000 to 647,136, according to a report for Transport Scotland.
Details have emerged in a final business case presented by consultants Ernst & Young before work starts on reinstating the line between Edinburgh and Tweedbank for the first time since 1969.
The firm said the pure economic spin-off would amount to only half of the return on the current estimated outlay of £350m. The cost of the line has already risen from about £300m.
Venture capitals and risk assessor Peter Smail said of the plunge in the cost-benefit ratio: "There is no rail project I have ever heard of in the rest of the UK where anything like this ratio has been accepted."
Mr Smail, who is based in the Borders, added: "There will be very heavy early losses and this line is clearly not viable. There are many better rail projects we should be supporting, and this one should be scrapped."
Transport Scotland insisted it remained on course to generate benefits of up to 30% greater than overall costs, including the creation of up to 400 jobs during building work, and said the route would give those living in the Borders and Midlothian greater access to jobs in the capital with higher wages.
A spokesman said: "We are delivering a railway for the people of the Borders for the first time in more than 40 years. This will provide benefits to the local economy, the jobs market, housing and inward investment opportunities.
"When we include accessibility benefits to the residents of Midlothian and the Borders, which was one of the main objectives of the scheme, the benefit-cost ratio of the scheme is up to 1.3, meaning it will generate benefits up to 30% greater than overall costs."
When reinstating the Waverley Line from Edinburgh to Galashiels was first costed at £155m, it was estimated the project would generate economic benefits that well outweighed the investment.
The project has previously faced comparisons with the Edinburgh Trams project, which soared in cost by millions of pounds and had its route truncated.
Labour's transport spokesman Richard Baker said: "SNP ministers' leadership of this project has been a total shambles.
"They couldn't find a private backer, it has been heavily delayed, and now we learn in the intervening period the business case has been affected."
Graeme Bell, the Borders area chairman of the Federation of Small Businesses, said too little attention had been paid in the report to the railway benefiting tourism or attracting new residents to the Borders.
He added: "That's a real deficiency in the report, because there is more benefit in reversing this flow to Edinburgh."
Nicholas Watson, former councillor and leader of the Borders Party, said: "I love trains but this scheme is a dud. It is slow, only serves a fraction of Borders residents, can't carry freight and is a desperate waste of public money.
"Why should taxpayers across Scotland pay for a colossally wasteful project which the great majority of Borderers don't even want?"
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article