Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Report says HS2 project offers ``poorer``return for tax payers investment than an alternative scheme to improve existing lines and services.
Cameron`s father in law Lord Astor agrees with the alternative scheme....bad day at the office could also be a bad day at home.
It could also prevent us buying German trains and rolling stock.................
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
I agree. HS2 is a vanity project we can ill afford and shall not need for 25 years at least.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
Google "Interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system".
Guest 730- Registered: 5 Nov 2011
- Posts: 221
It does seem an awful lot of money and disruption just to get to Birmingham a bit quicker. I travel to Birmingham, to the NEC, twice a year and the service is pretty good now. Fast train every twenty minutes, even on a Sunday. One hour ten minutes from Euston to Birmingham International. Why can't they just have longer trains and cut down on first class. First class is never full.
Also what about intermediate places like Rugby or Coventry. Coventry for example takes about an hour from Euston. That won't be any quicker because HS2 won't stop at Coventry, you'd have to go into Birmingham and then back out again. By the time you've done that you might just as well have got a train straight there.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
I might have this wrong and correct me if I am wrong but this is all about shortening a rail trip by 30minutes, is it not?
Any project that will bring employment and prosperity to this country should be given much consideration. But the end product and necessity must be just as important.
How many commuters would benefit, bearing in mind they are the same commuters on a daily basis and what would they gain by getting to work 30 minutes early?
The only benefit for them, as far as I can see, is, they will get to work early or if their employment times change, they will get an extra, daily hour, with their family.
How would it affect ordinary travellers? 30 minutes to spend more time and money in shops, 30 extra minutes visiting family?
I fail to see how £32Billion is justified on shortening a train ride by 30 minutes.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,693
Gary - that does seem to be the top and bottom of it
There were 3 options for this
The first would be to upgrade the existing line, signalling etc, run longer services etc - probably the cheapest, least disruption to communities along the route, maximum disruption to travellers whilst the work is ongoing. Perhaps most importantly not sexy, no one will remember you for doing it and doesnt make lots of people lots of money.
The second was to build a new line from Euston/St Pancras to Heathrow (interchange with Great Western, Crossrail} and then follow the existing M40 route into Birmingham and then the M6 to Manchester. Improved connections, doesnt impact existing Birmingham - London services, minimum impact to travelling public, limited impact to communities along the route.
The third was the scheme they chose, which misses Heathrow out entirely, slices through huge swathes of the Chilterns, impacts existing services significantly, but of course makes a name for Justine Greening, makes lots of construction companies, consultants etc money.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
The sensible view, which I share, is that this is not necessary - in this day of austerity and serious structural deficit, how can a spend of £35 billion be justified ?
Roger
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
We still have an essentially Victorian train system (and probably less coverage and speed than Victorian times) so investment is definately needed to get us up to the 21st Century..... (not saying this is the answer though)
Been nice knowing you :)
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
investment in rail is presently done by the passengers through the fares they pay, i think this is wrong.
we don't have traffic problems locally in the normal run of things but other places would grind to a halt if current rail passengers decided to take to their cars.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Ross.
I wanted to add "make lots of people lots of money" to my post, as a possible reason for its conception but I know the reaction I would have recieved.
I do not believe it is the sensible option, nor do many other's.
So it does beggar the question, why discard Bombardier and throw £35Billion at this lot?
Paul.
Investment on improvements is necessary and is happening as we speak but as I have stated on other threads, it is being abused.
Many companies are using past and present government's as a cash cow and this desperately needs sorting out.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 657- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,037
As well as the valid points others have raised I am also concerned as it is a threat to Arthur Beresford Pite's 30 Euston Square building where I worked for many years. The building is now being refurbished by the Royal College of General Practitioners as there new HQ opening later this year. I had it Grade 2 special listed in the 90s because of its significant architectural importance.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,823
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Button
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 3,003
Jan Higgins and Ross Miller like this
(Not my real name.)
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,823
Wonder how many of Sunaks pledges will he achieve?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Dover Pilot- Registered: 28 Jul 2018
- Posts: 342
All smoke and mirrors. The real reason HS2 was scrapped is because the country is broke and with Tory government debt at 100% and yields above financial crisis levels you ain't seen nothing yet.
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
Dover Pilot wrote:All smoke and mirrors. The real reason HS2 was scrapped is because the country is broke and with Tory government debt at 100% and yields above financial crisis levels you ain't seen nothing yet.
There's an awful lot of truth in that. And the rest of the world knows it.
Captain Haddock
- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,848
Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme: statistics
11.7 million employee jobs were furloughed through the scheme, at a cost of £70 billion.
At the end of the scheme, at 30 September 2021, 1.16 million jobs were on furlough, which was 4% of eligible jobs. 21% of employers had at least one member of staff on furlough. The number of furloughed jobs fell by 193,600 from the end of August to the end of September.
Just one of the reasons why we (like most countries are 'broke'?)
https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/CG_DEBT_GDP@GDD/CHN/FRA/DEU/ITA/JPN/GBR/USA"Shall we go, you and I, while we can? Through the transitive nightfall of diamonds"
Captain Haddock- Location: Marlinspike Hall
- Registered: 8 Oct 2012
- Posts: 7,848
Forumites will also be pleased to know that the Government's largesse stretched giving me £600 towards heating my canal boat!
https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/news/government-energy-support-now-available-to-continuous-cruisers
Little wonder the average person in the UK has 17,773 in savings as of 2023!
"Shall we go, you and I, while we can? Through the transitive nightfall of diamonds"
Button- Location: Dover
- Registered: 22 Jul 2016
- Posts: 3,003
I don't recall 'the country is broke' being mentioned on the C4 coverage last night; rather, it was 'HS2 is no longer a good thing to spend money on'.
For once I enjoyed Guru-Murphy interviewing a minister, something like this:
Murphy: how much will the Leeds tram cost?
Minister: dunno.
Murphy: so you can't say whether you'll get all these various things for the HS2 £36billion [I think it was £36bn].
Minister: ah, but we will deliver them.
I don't know why he dodged the question/comment, when he could've said 'we'll start with £36bn and put our hand back in our pocket if we have to' or 'if we have change from £36bn we'll think of something extra'.
(Not my real name.)
ray hutstone- Registered: 1 Apr 2018
- Posts: 2,158
Captain Haddock wrote:Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme: statistics
11.7 million employee jobs were furloughed through the scheme, at a cost of £70 billion.
At the end of the scheme, at 30 September 2021, 1.16 million jobs were on furlough, which was 4% of eligible jobs. 21% of employers had at least one member of staff on furlough. The number of furloughed jobs fell by 193,600 from the end of August to the end of September.
Just one of the reasons why we (like most countries are 'broke'?)
https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/CG_DEBT_GDP@GDD/CHN/FRA/DEU/ITA/JPN/GBR/USA
No mention of the extent of fraud or failure to reclaim it. No consideration of funds wasted on ineffective procurement (£37bn for track and trace anyone?) Maybe you should ask Michelle Mone to subsidise your canal boat hobby?
And, of course, the 4% drag on GDP caused by Brexit (ONS figures) is hardly helping our GDP to debt ratio.
