Latest news with #Birmingham
BBC News
an hour ago
- Entertainment
- BBC News
Lancs thump Notts and Durham win Blast opener
Keaton Jennings made 95 from just 49 balls as Lancashire thumped Nottinghamshire by 47 runs to make it two wins from two in the T20 T20 captain led from the front as his side posted 216-3 having won the toss at Old Trafford, with Luke Wells striking a career-best 87 from 50 balls in a record opening stand of Henriques briefly threatened a chase, making 60 from 32, but it was a lone hand as Notts were bowled out for 169 in the final over. Elsewhere, Ollie Robinson led Durham to victory in their opening game of the competition as they beat Birmingham by three wickets with two overs to spare. Beleaguered Lancashire found succour in their first T20 game of the year with a home win against Worcestershire and they backed it up with a dominant display against struck eight fours and six sixes in running up his second-best T20 score and Wells posted a new highest score, featuring seven boundaries and six stand of 177 in 15.4 overs was the highest T20 partnership for any wicket for Lancashire and put them out of lost openers Lyndon James and Joe Clarke cheaply in the powerplay and tumbled away, with 20-year-old Charlie Barnard taking 3-23 on his debut and Tom Aspinwall 3-26. At Edgbaston, Durham won the toss and took three wickets in the opening 17 balls of the game to set up a comfortable Hain was the only batsman to show for the Bears, making 45 in 28 balls, but New Zealand's Jimmy Neesham took 3-34 as the hosts were bowled out for Clark provided the ideal start to the chase with 40 from 23 deliveries, including five fours and a six, before Robinson took up the mantle, eventually out for 45 from departure, and the wicket soon after of Kasey Aldridge, took some gloss off the victory margin, but it was still achieved with 17 balls in hand.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Business
- Yahoo
The rot at the heart of British infrastructure projects is endemic
When elected to power, Labour promised to be the party of the builders, not the blockers, and committed itself to unleashing a housebuilding and infrastructure boom. Nearly a year into government, and the legislation that is supposed to make this happen, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, is slowly wending its way through Parliament, having not yet been submitted to the House of Lords for scrutiny. The intention is to cut planning restrictions, but whether it also delivers in reducing the spiralling costs and interminable delays of development in the UK is anyone's guess. There are good reasons for scepticism. Meanwhile, the endless sorrow of HS2, the most expensive piece of infrastructure ever built in Britain, continues apace. According to a recent report in Rail magazine, which has not been denied, the London to Birmingham route is now likely to be pushed back a further six years, and may not be complete until 2039. Estimated costs have also further escalated to a jaw dropping £100bn, this despite the fact that the northern leg has been scrapped and that initially at least, the line will terminate not as planned at Euston but at Old Oak on the outskirts of London. Just to add a touch of the surreal to this towering example of ill-spent taxpayer pounds, the spanking new Birmingham terminal at Curzon Street is likely to be completed years before the line itself, and will therefore stand empty, its seven platforms gathering tumble weed in the long wait for their first passengers. In any case, the travails of HS2 have become a symbol of Britain's seemingly stultifying inability to get anything done. Somewhat misleadingly so, as it happens. The largest part of the problem with HS2 is not the planning constraints, or even the ruinous project management, but that it should never have been attempted in the first place, an admission disarmingly made by Peter Mandelson, now Britain's ambassador to Washington, more than 12 years ago. The previous Labour government only went ahead with the project, he admitted, because it was afraid of being upstaged by the Tories in creating a high-speed, north-south link. The economic case for it was always 'flimsy', he further conceded. Back then, it should be pointed out, the line was expected to cost 'only' £35bn before rolling stock, and include stage two branch lines to Manchester, Leeds and Wigan. The whole thing should have been axed there and then, but the Coalition government was terrified of the stick it would get from northern lobbies and voters for cancelling a project seen as totemic in any levelling up agenda. What's more, so much time, effort and money had by then already been expended that it was considered too big a write off to be politically palatable. So on it went, but the main explanation for its mounting costs was already obvious. Planning restrictions, constantly changing specifications, outlandish environmental demands such as the notorious £100m 'bat tunnel', were admittedly a part of it. Yet the contrast with HS1, which came in roughly on time and on budget, could scarcely have been greater. HS1, which links the channel tunnel and London, actually had a purpose and an economic rationale. Furthermore, it had a responsible minister, John Prescott, who after taunts from the French to the effect that the British couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, was determined to grip the project and push it through. HS2 has never commanded a similar consensus or a convincing commercial justification, making it an ongoing object of bitterness, compromise and delay. Oppressive planning rules and environmental impact studies can no longer be used as an excuse; for HS2, these have all been put to bed, but still the costs keep rising. Shockingly, according to a report by the National Audit Office, simply cancelling the second phase of the project linking Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds is in itself likely to consume £100m. Why? Apparently it's to do with 'safely and efficiently' when closing down Phase 2 construction sites, insignificant though these are. Losses on land already compulsorily purchased but no longer needed further up the ante. And they wonder why the country is going bust. The Department for Transport, the authority responsible for overseeing and funding the project, might seem a particularly egregious example of Britain's inability to get anything done, but sadly these failings are not confined to the public sector. The other standout example is the privately funded Hinkley Point C nuclear power station in Somerset. It should have been up and running by now. Indeed, the one-time boss of the sponsoring company, EDF Energy, once ventured that by 2017 people would be cooking their Christmas lunches on power supplied by Hinkley. It scarcely needs restating that the latest target date for completion stretches out to 2031. In the meantime, costs have ballooned from an initial estimate of £18bn to £46bn in today's money. Once up and running, Hinkley will be one of the most expensive sources of electricity anywhere in the world. If it's any consolation, the UK is far from alone in the sclerosis that seemingly grips infrastructure development, gainful or otherwise. Like the UK, Germany used to be good at this kind of stuff, but became a laughing stock after Berlin's Brandenburg airport came in nine years behind schedule at a cost of more than three times the initial estimate. A McKinsey study of more than 500 global infrastructure projects found that only 5pc of them were completed within their original budget and schedule. The average project ran 37pc over budget and 53pc over schedule. Separate research by Oxford's Saïd Business School found that of more than 3000 infrastructure projects studied, only 0.2pc were completed on time and to budget. All the same, the situation appears to be notably worse in the UK than elsewhere. According to the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (Nista), the cost of construction in Britain has risen by nearly a third more than GDP per capita since 2007. That often asked question – why is it that we seem to be getting ever fewer bangs for our bucks in terms of public services and state-backed infrastructure – is partly answered by phenomena such as this. It's not just about population growth or the demands of an ageing society; it's also about incompetence, lack of clear objectives, and a cartel-like contracting industry that knows how to play the system to its own ends. At both national and local level, it's endemic and verging on the corrupt. As it embarks on the fantastically costly and disruptive decarbonisation of Britain's electricity network, the Government promises that it will be addressing these and many of the other issues that have been slowing things down and compounding their cost. Relatively straightforward improvements in project delivery systems alone could reduce final construction costs by between 10pc and 25pc, Nista says. Don't hold your breath. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Why is it that Britain cannot get anything done?
When elected to power, Labour promised to be the party of the builders, not the blockers, and committed itself to unleashing a housebuilding and infrastructure boom. Nearly a year into government, and the legislation that is supposed to make this happen, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, is slowly wending its way through Parliament, having not yet been submitted to the House of Lords for scrutiny. The intention is to cut planning restrictions, but whether it also delivers in reducing the spiralling costs and interminable delays of development in the UK is anyone's guess. There are good reasons for scepticism. Meanwhile, the endless sorrow of HS2, the most expensive piece of infrastructure ever built in Britain, continues apace. According to a recent report in Rail magazine, which has not been denied, the London to Birmingham route is now likely to be pushed back a further six years, and may not be complete until 2039. Estimated costs have also further escalated to a jaw dropping £100bn, this despite the fact that the northern leg has been scrapped and that initially at least, the line will terminate not as planned at Euston but at Old Oak on the outskirts of London. Just to add a touch of the surreal to this towering example of ill-spent taxpayer pounds, the spanking new Birmingham terminal at Curzon Street is likely to be completed years before the line itself, and will therefore stand empty, its seven platforms gathering tumble weed in the long wait for their first passengers. In any case, the travails of HS2 have become a symbol of Britain's seemingly stultifying inability to get anything done. Somewhat misleadingly so, as it happens. The largest part of the problem with HS2 is not the planning constraints, or even the ruinous project management, but that it should never have been attempted in the first place, an admission disarmingly made by Peter Mandelson, now Britain's ambassador to Washington, more than 12 years ago. The previous Labour government only went ahead with the project, he admitted, because it was afraid of being upstaged by the Tories in creating a high-speed, north-south link. The economic case for it was always 'flimsy', he further conceded. Back then, it should be pointed out, the line was expected to cost 'only' £35bn before rolling stock, and include stage two branch lines to Manchester, Leeds and Wigan. The whole thing should have been axed there and then, but the Coalition government was terrified of the stick it would get from northern lobbies and voters for cancelling a project seen as totemic in any levelling up agenda. What's more, so much time, effort and money had by then already been expended that it was considered too big a write off to be politically palatable. So on it went, but the main explanation for its mounting costs was already obvious. Planning restrictions, constantly changing specifications, outlandish environmental demands such as the notorious £100m 'bat tunnel', were admittedly a part of it. Yet the contrast with HS1, which came in roughly on time and on budget, could scarcely have been greater. HS1, which links the channel tunnel and London, actually had a purpose and an economic rationale. Furthermore, it had a responsible minister, John Prescott, who after taunts from the French to the effect that the British couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery, was determined to grip the project and push it through. HS2 has never commanded a similar consensus or a convincing commercial justification, making it an ongoing object of bitterness, compromise and delay. Oppressive planning rules and environmental impact studies can no longer be used as an excuse; for HS2, these have all been put to bed, but still the costs keep rising. Shockingly, according to a report by the National Audit Office, simply cancelling the second phase of the project linking Birmingham to Manchester and Leeds is in itself likely to consume £100m. Why? Apparently it's to do with 'safely and efficiently' when closing down Phase 2 construction sites, insignificant though these are. Losses on land already compulsorily purchased but no longer needed further up the ante. And they wonder why the country is going bust. The Department for Transport, the authority responsible for overseeing and funding the project, might seem a particularly egregious example of Britain's inability to get anything done, but sadly these failings are not confined to the public sector. The other standout example is the privately funded Hinkley Point C nuclear power station in Somerset. It should have been up and running by now. Indeed, the one-time boss of the sponsoring company, EDF Energy, once ventured that by 2017 people would be cooking their Christmas lunches on power supplied by Hinkley. It scarcely needs restating that the latest target date for completion stretches out to 2031. In the meantime, costs have ballooned from an initial estimate of £18bn to £46bn in today's money. Once up and running, Hinkley will be one of the most expensive sources of electricity anywhere in the world. If it's any consolation, the UK is far from alone in the sclerosis that seemingly grips infrastructure development, gainful or otherwise. Like the UK, Germany used to be good at this kind of stuff, but became a laughing stock after Berlin's Brandenburg airport came in nine years behind schedule at a cost of more than three times the initial estimate. A McKinsey study of more than 500 global infrastructure projects found that only 5pc of them were completed within their original budget and schedule. The average project ran 37pc over budget and 53pc over schedule. Separate research by Oxford's Saïd Business School found that of more than 3000 infrastructure projects studied, only 0.2pc were completed on time and to budget. All the same, the situation appears to be notably worse in the UK than elsewhere. According to the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (Nista), the cost of construction in Britain has risen by nearly a third more than GDP per capita since 2007. That often asked question – why is it that we seem to be getting ever fewer bangs for our bucks in terms of public services and state-backed infrastructure – is partly answered by phenomena such as this. It's not just about population growth or the demands of an ageing society; it's also about incompetence, lack of clear objectives, and a cartel-like contracting industry that knows how to play the system to its own ends. At both national and local level, it's endemic and verging on the corrupt. As it embarks on the fantastically costly and disruptive decarbonisation of Britain's electricity network, the Government promises that it will be addressing these and many of the other issues that have been slowing things down and compounding their cost.
BBC News
7 hours ago
- Business
- BBC News
West Midlands Combined Authority CEO Laura Shoaf steps down
The chief executive of the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) is stepping down after four years in the Shoaf will remain in the role until 17 June and will continue as chair of Shadow Great British Railways, which was set up last year by the government under its plans to bring the UK's railways back into public Shoaf said she was "sad" to be leaving the organisation she has been with since its inception, but was confident she was leaving it in good WMCA said Ed Cox, deputy chief executive, will step up as interim chief while a recruitment process gets under way for a permanent replacement. "I have lived and worked in the West Midlands for over 20 years, and I am proud that I have been able to make a real difference for our residents," Ms Shoaf said."I will always champion our wonderful region and while I am sad to be leaving the combined authority, I know I am leaving it with people who care passionately about the West Midlands and will continue to see it go from strength to strength." CBE honour West Midlands Mayor Richard Parker said Ms Shoaf had done an "exemplary job for the region" during her time in the 2022, she was honoured with a CBE for services to economic regeneration in the West Midlands."I want to thank Laura for her decades of service to the West Midlands," the mayor said."I especially want to recognise the work she has done in my first year to help me embed and deliver my priorities."I want to wish her every success in the future, especially continuing in her role as Chair of Shadow Great British Railways." This news has been gathered by the Local Democracy Reporting Service Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
BBC News
8 hours ago
- Business
- BBC News
Birmingham bin strike deal offer was watered down, says union
A deal offered to striking bin workers in Birmingham has been watered down, their union has called for further negotiations with the city council after a "ball park" proposal discussed at talks with conciliation service Acas had been revised "by government commissioners and the council leader".An all-out strike in the city is now in its third month, after staff walked out on 11 March over plans to downgrade some roles, which the union says could cost workers £8,000 a City Council has been approached for a response over the current deal it is offering. Talks between the Labour-run council and Unite have been taking place with the conciliation service since the start of May, after previous negotiations to resolve the strike ended without a union's latest statement accuses the authority of missing deadlines on the proposals which had been tabled on Friday evening. "After weeks and weeks of saying one thing in public and another to workers, the government commissioners finally allow a proposal to be put on the table," said Unite's General Secretary Sharon Graham. She said the offer had been watered down by the council leader and government commissioners "who were not in the negotiating room". The union leader said the offer would be discussed with reps over the weekend and a detailed response would be issued ahead of a reconvened Acas meeting. "The actual decision makers now need to be in the room at the further ACAS talks," she said. Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
