HS2: The entire project has been muddied from the outset by a near constant stream of misguided decisions and political U-turns.

WHAT will be revealed in the new Labour government’s first budget at the end of this month.

One thing, which seems almost certain from the briefings going on this week, is that the Euston terminus of HS2 will be given the green light.

Speaking at the London Transport Museum’s annual dinner and auction last night, the Mayor of London was expected to say it is “looking increasingly positive” that the multi-billion pound railway will terminate in the city centre, rather than at Old Oak Common.

The Sunday Times has reported that the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is preparing to approve plans for the required 4.5-mile tunnel link and for an overhaul of Euston station itself.

A year ago, the then prime minister Rishi Sunak announced plans to cut HS2 costs to the public purse by ensuring that the Euston stretch of the railway works and station would only be built if funded by private investment.

A hastily composed document revealed vague plans to build 10,000 homes on the bulldozed land in and around the station.

The private investment required included billions needed to complete the tunnelling between Old Oak Common and into Euston – a cost of several billions, one that few people in the know believed would ever be met by investment giants or office and housing developers.

If the government does seek to restore the project it will be a huge new billion-pound-plus public purse commitment.

This at a time when the government is supposedly showing us it is being forced into “tough decisions” like axing the winter fuel allowance and the two-child benefit cap.

Sir Keir Starmer, in a statement to the New Journal, a fortnight ago said he expected the government to make an announcement on HS2 that would bring “clarity” to residents in his constituency, the worst affected by the scandal-dogged railway project.

It is a project we cannot forget that Mr Starmer opposed and voted against before he became leader of the Labour Party.

The entire project has been muddied from the outset by a near constant stream of misguided decisions and political U-turns.

Designs for Euston station have been published as often as they have been torn up.

Is it possible for politicians to bring clarity to a project that has flipped and flopped so many times over so many years?

Can a project that so few people, other than rail and construction industry lobbyists, have ever actually wanted avoid ambiguity?