Electrification scrapped.

[Solent&Wessex]

According to a report in today's Sun, the electrification of the Liverpool to Manchester and London to Swansea lines has been axed because they cost too much money apparently. Lord Attlee blamed the state of the public finances. He also said the Government was seeking additional savings of £682 million from the transport budget over the next year.

I cannot paste a link as I am on my mobile.

 

[4SRKT]

Seems reasonable.

 

[tripleseis]

Lovely. This will probably cost us more in the long run once oil prices start to get higher.

 

[starrymarkb]

So if it has been cancelled what happens now? Life extend the HSTs again? Son of Voyager?

 

[4SRKT]

Lovely. This will probably cost us more in the long run once oil prices start to get higher.

May well be true, but if the ching's not there we can't have it. Surely this is the most fundamental lesson that has to have been learnt from the economic collapse following half a generation of most people spending money they didn't have like drunken sailors.

Anyway, if the economy recovers, this can be relooked at. At least all the preparatory work's been done. If the economy's permanently knackered then the country will go into long term decline and there will be less rather than more need for infrastructure of this type.

 

[Wyvern]

From the horse's mouth;

CLICK: Lord Attlee replied: "We are committed to High Speed 2 but you will understand the problems about expenditure on electrification in the current economic climate." The coalition agreement, however, expresses "support" for "further electrification of the rail network".

 

[paulravuslante]

I'm willing to be proven wrong, but I can't find any link to this news story. I would have thought something as major as this would be published over many news sources, rather than an 'exclusive' in The Sun. The only thing I have found is a link to a Welsh story after the coalition formed saying they were committed to electrification of the rail network (2 lines mentioned here).

I'm expecting this announcement to be made sooner or later in the light of the cuts that seem to be required.

 

[starrymarkb]

is being picked up by the Press Association
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=el...8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wn

This is an interesting read, FGW are apparently not keen of life extending HSTs
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news...ctric-bid/article-2311649-detail/article.html

THE boss of First Great Western has admitted that there are major doubts surrounding the £1 billion plans to electrify the main rail route between London and Bristol.

The project was a key part of Labour's transport policy and would slash rail journey times between Bristol and the capital by as much as an hour.

But in an exclusive interview with the Evening Post, First Great Western managing director Mark Hopwood revealed that his company is in talks with the new Coalition Government over the future of the scheme.

He said: "Electrification does make sense in terms of reliability and the cost of running the service, but in the current climate we have to be realistic when it comes to spending on major projects.


"However, the Government is still going to have to take a view. The high speed trains we use on that route are now 34 years old and reaching the end of their life span.

"Whatever happens, the trains will have to be replaced in 2013 and it would be a real challenge for us to refurbish them."

Mr Hopwood took charge of the company more than two years ago at a time when it was fighting for its future.

The franchise had one of the worst records in the country in terms of punctuality, cancellations and creations. Many passengers were threatening to boycott the company altogether and at one stage the Government warned that unless the situation improved it would remove its franchise altogether.

But the company is now one of the best performing in the country and passengers numbers are increasing by around 10 per cent each year.

Mr Hopwood said: "We have gone about our job quietly and I guess the fact that there are no longer protests or people waving placards outside stations tells you everything you need to know.

"We changed the way we do things at First Great Western by putting our customers at the centre of everything. In many ways we have become victims of our own success because we are reaching maximum capacity on many of our busiest roots."

First is expecting to bring in extra carriages next year but they will largely replace rolling stock currently on hire from other operators.

Mr Hopwood added: "We are in talks to increase rolling stock but anything we get is likely to be minimal. There are some areas where we still need to improve and we are aware of that."

Unsurprisingly, Mr Hopwood defended the cost of rail fares during peak times. He said: "When you compare travelling by train it is a lot cheaper than using a car if you take into account the cost of petrol, parking and tolls on the Severn Bridge.

"Travelling by rail is more popular than it has been for years. Bristol has always struggled with congestion and if you took rail travel out of the equation then the situation would be much, much worse than it is now."

 

[Greenback]

It may be impossible for the government to fund electrification at the moment due to the deficit, but long term we can't afford not to electrify our major rail lines.

Weren't the government talkign about longer franchises in return for investment? There was a lot of support for this during Labour's time, but they refused to do it, apart from Chiltern. This could be a good opportunity if soemthing can be worked out.

 

[tripleseis]

I've actually wondered if Chiltern actually have any long term plans for electrifying their lines out of Marylebone. It would make sense for them to do it eventually.

I do agree the GWML will have to be electrified eventually. HSTs can't be kept forever and the benefits outweigh the costs in the long run.

It's a shame we had a government that wasted so much money it's mindboggling.

 

[Daimler]

is being picked up by the Press Association
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=el...8&tbo=u&tbs=nws:1&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wn

This is an interesting read, FGW are apparently not keen of life extending HSTs
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news...ctric-bid/article-2311649-detail/article.html

Interesting, since the last thing I heard (it may have been in Modern Railways was that one of the ROSCOs was talking about overhauling the coaches so that they'll be good for another 20 years.

Anyway, whether FGW is keen or not, I don't think replacing the entire HST fleet with a load of diesel trains whose lifespan may well be cut short by eventual electrification is exactly 'on' in this 'age of austerity'.

 

[Oswyntail]

I have long been puzzled by the way this is covered. "Longer franchises to encourage investment"? Surely the investment is by Network Rail (ostensibly independent of government and not for profit - cue hollow laughter) and the ROSCOs. The TOCs can then choose what stock they use to satisfy their own business plan. Now i realise that the hire costs of the stock are set by the ROSCOs to meet their investment requirements, so would potentially be higher for short-term agreements with franchisees. But, unless someone, somewhere is sitting inflexibly and not negotiating with potential customers, this should all be capable of being worked out.
In short, why are NR and the ROSCOs not taking the risks?

 

[PhilipW]

The electrification schemes are (or were) being funded by borrowing against Network Rail's Asset Base. As such the cost does not appear on the governemnt's book.

Therefore cancellation does not benefit the government at all. The countrry's deficit is not even reduced by £1.

True or false ?

I think true.

Note also that the Scottish government's electrification of Glasgow to Edinburgh is also being financed the same way. They have no plans to cancel that irrespective of what the Conservatives or Lib Dems think.

 

[yorksrob]

It will be interesting to know whether they are going to pull the plug on the new Thameslink rolling stock as well, particularly since they appeared to be guaranteeing that the whole project would go ahead recently. If they cancel the Liverpool - Manchester electrification, they could be stuck with a lot of electric rolling stock with nowhere to cascade it to (unless they plan to use it to strengthen existing electric services in which case they'd probably have to spend on platform lengthening and new car parks etc).

 

[EMT Commuter]

On the GW aren't the OLEs being extended to Reading for Cross Rail? Makes sense to extend even further, especially when there is a +ve business case. I understand one of the main benefits (which is rarely mentioned) is the current cost of diesel engine replacement, which is where the TOC/ROSCO benefits.

 

[Mojo]

I have long been puzzled by the way this is covered. "Longer franchises to encourage investment"? Surely the investment is by Network Rail (ostensibly independent of government and not for profit - cue hollow laughter) and the ROSCOs.

Not always, eg. look at Chiltern who funded the infrastructure rather than Network Rail.

Whilst I'm a huge supporter of high-speed rail and would like to see it, I think this is a bad decision to build HS2 and not electrification or other small schemes in urban areas which really need to go ahead. Given the limited pot of money I'd rather electrification rather than HS2 until we've got the money sorted out.

 

[EMT Commuter]

Given the limited pot of money I'd rather electrification rather than HS2 until we've got the money sorted out.

Yeah, I'd agree. More people will benefit from that type of investment. Let's get the wires up to Sheffield too.

 

[robert2000]

i knew the electrification was never gonna happen.

be honest, we do have a pretty poor rail system in the uk.

 

[Lampshade]

Woo, plenty more years bouncing around on 142s then

 

[starrymarkb]

Woo, plenty more years bouncing around on 142s then

TBH 142 replacement isn't as big problem as HST replacement. Suitable DMUs are in production at the moment (Class 172 and C4K), but finding replacement 125mph diesel stock will be a lot trickier.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

The article I saw was a small piece on page 2 of today's Sun. Which incidentally I didn't buy, but found on the train at work!

 

[4SRKT]

Which incidentally I didn't buy, but found on the train at work!

Oh aye!

 

[Lampshade]

TBH 142 replacement isn't as big problem as HST replacement. Suitable DMUs are in production at the moment (Class 172 and C4K), but finding replacement 125mph diesel stock will be a lot trickier.

Here's an idea, surely the plans for the HST are still around, why don't they just update it to modern standards and erm... build it?

 

[TheExmoorBeast]

Well if they can't do the major electrification schemes why not do some of the small ones and fill in the gaps?

So you could do for example:

Reading - Basingstoke
Wokingham - Ash
Shalford - Reigate
Oxted - Uckfield line
Ore - Ashford (Kent) (Marshlink)

All of those are relatively small projects that will release much needed DMUs for other areas which aren't even "in the frame" for electrification.

 

[Geezertronic]

The problem is where is the electric stock going to come from to replace the DMUs?

 

[Greenback]

I agree with those posters who have said that electrification should be a higher priority than HS2.

 

[Fincra5]

Whilst I'm a huge supporter of high-speed rail and would like to see it, I think this is a bad decision to build HS2 and not electrification or other small schemes in urban areas which really need to go ahead. Given the limited pot of money I'd rather electrification rather than HS2 until we've got the money sorted out.

Couldn't agree more. Focus on the mainlines before even bothering with HS2. They are far more important to the everyday traveller.

 

[Wyvern]

Whilst I'm a huge supporter of high-speed rail and would like to see it, I think this is a bad decision to build HS2 and not electrification or other small schemes in urban areas which really need to go ahead. Given the limited pot of money I'd rather electrification rather than HS2 until we've got the money sorted out.

Yes but HS2 has lots of kudos. Simply electrifying and straightening (?) existing lines is just housekeeping that doesnt have any publicity value.

 

[caughtonatrain]

The electrification schemes are (or were) being funded by borrowing against Network Rail's Asset Base. As such the cost does not appear on the governemnt's book.

Therefore cancellation does not benefit the government at all. The countrry's deficit is not even reduced by £1.

True or false ?

I think true.
....

I think true, too.

There's a lot of misinformation out there about the deficit, public finance, etc. This is a symbolic sacrifice, one that will not save a £ in either short or long term, because this government are using it as a way of hoodwinking us all into their real ideological agenda - small government, every man for himself, attacks on public transport and other public services.

The fact that we're all being carried away by this "only spend what you can afford" guff is frightening. For eons, we have never been in a position of only spending what we had. It's called usuary and investment, and it's (sadly, you might say) what makes the world go round... and it's what is behind economic growth.

There's a choice: back to barbarianism, or invest in the public good through things like decent public transport. I remain to be convinced that Britain is really as "broken", financially or socially, as the gov't (or the Sun) would have us believe.

We should be having HS2 AND electrification. And if I have to pay an extra penny or two in the pound in tax (Income tax NOT regressive VAT) then so be it.

 

[4SRKT]

I think true, too.


We should be having HS2 AND electrification. And if I have to pay an extra penny or two in the pound in tax (Income tax NOT regressive VAT) then so be it.

Judging by the election result most people don't agree and would rather have that money in their pockets. I agree that electrification is desirable, but HS2 is a total vanity project, not benefitting most people. And don't forget that this income tax rise you speak of would be paid for by everyone.