Transport for the North - NPR funding stopped

[baza585]

Perhaps they realise the two issues are inextricably linked.

Possibly but many of the mayors appear to be more interested in making political points than doing the less populist things that might improve the daily travelling lives of the folk who use public transport in the north of England.

Disappointing that they let personal ambition and political dogma cloud their judgement and give the Treasury a ready made excuse for retaking control.

 

[quantinghome]

Possibly but many of the mayors appear to be more interested in making political points than doing the less populist things that might improve the daily travelling lives of the folk who use public transport in the north of England.

Disappointing that they let personal ambition and political dogma cloud their judgement and give the Treasury a ready made excuse for retaking control.

I agree there is a huge need to get the normal day to day things resolved - bus regulation being the prime example, and also ticketing systems. But this is precisely what the metro mayors are clamouring for. West Yorkshire was promised powers over buses. The new Mayor has done everything she can to put this in place but the government is still forcing a ludicrously dragged-out consultation which will only conclude in 2024.

So I'm afraid I can't agree with you. And I also disagree with you about 'making political points'. The 'integrated rail plan' is an absolute dog's breakfast, a catastrophe in the making. I would expect all the northern Mayors to be speaking out in the strongest possible terms on this.

 

[CdBrux]

I don't entirely disagree with that either - and one good thing about these new plans are serving Sheffield and Nottingham city centres directly. However, I was more making the point that Parkway stations are also important - it would for instance be serious folly not to build the Manchester Airport one.

Absolutely!

 

[baza585]

I agree there is a huge need to get the normal day to day things resolved - bus regulation being the prime example, and also ticketing systems. But this is precisely what the metro mayors are clamouring for. West Yorkshire was promised powers over buses. The new Mayor has done everything she can to put this in place but the government is still forcing a ludicrously dragged-out consultation which will only conclude in 2024.

So I'm afraid I can't agree with you. And I also disagree with you about 'making political points'. The 'integrated rail plan' is an absolute dog's breakfast, a catastrophe in the making. I would expect all the northern Mayors to be speaking out in the strongest possible terms on this.

So you don't think Andy Burnham's response to anything this Government suggests in any sphere has anything at all to do with his personal ambition to lead his party and become PM.....

I have voted Labour consistently for the last 45 years but am getting heartily fed up with his antics.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So you don't think Andy Burnham's response to anything this Government suggests in any sphere has anything at all to do with his personal ambition to lead his party and become PM.....

I have voted Labour consistently for the last 45 years but am getting heartily fed up with his antics.

Personally I think he is the only hope Labour has to win a General Election this side of 2050. He has after all managed to get Mancs to vote for him, and he's a Scouser (from Aintree like me). That takes some doing.

Starmer is beyond useless. I had high hopes for him, but all he is is a naysayer, criticising anything Boris does or says without coming up with viable alternative policies. I don't see how I can vote for a party whose only policy seems to be "the Tories are wrong", even when they aren't.

Positive politics, not negative ones, are needed. Forget what Boris is or isn't doing. Say what you will do and why it will make things better. He can do that.

 

[quantinghome]

Personally I think he is the only hope Labour has to win a General Election this side of 2050. He has after all managed to get Mancs to vote for him, and he's a Scouser (from Aintree like me). That takes some doing.

Starmer is beyond useless. I had high hopes for him, but all he is is a naysayer, criticising anything Boris does or says without coming up with viable alternative policies. I don't see how I can vote for a party whose only policy seems to be "the Tories are wrong", even when they aren't.

Positive politics, not negative ones, are needed. Forget what Boris is or isn't doing. Say what you will do and why it will make things better. He can do that.

I would recommend taking a look at the CBI speeches given today.

In the area we are interested - transport investment, Keir has been completely clear on what his alternative would be - build HS2 and NPR in full. And he's right.

But it's true, Boris does say what he will do. Then doesn't do it.

So you don't think Andy Burnham's response to anything this Government suggests in any sphere has anything at all to do with his personal ambition to lead his party and become PM.....

I have voted Labour consistently for the last 45 years but am getting heartily fed up with his antics.

Of course it does. Any senior politician is going to have ambitions to lead. If the person in question has obvious leadership abilities, why would that be a bad thing? And any politician from any party is going to criticise their opponents and put forward their own perspective. Labour have always done this. So have the Tories. It's hardly unusual, indeed it's essential if you want government policy to be scrutinised. I really don't see what Andy's done as being out of order.

When the Tories come out with such a badly thought through plan such as the IRP, what do expect Labour politicians to do?

It's a bit difficult to not oppose a government that has screwed up in pretty much every policy area.

 

[baza585]

I would recommend taking a look at the CBI speeches given today.

In the area we are interested - transport investment, Keir has been completely clear on what his alternative would be - build HS2 and NPR in full. And he's right.

But it's true, Boris does say what he will do. Then doesn't do it.


Of course it does. Any senior politician is going to have ambitions to lead. If the person in question has obvious leadership abilities, why would that be a bad thing? And any politician from any party is going to criticise their opponents and put forward their own perspective. Labour have always done this. So have the Tories. It's hardly unusual, indeed it's essential if you want government policy to be scrutinised. I really don't see what Andy's done as being out of order.

When the Tories come out with such a badly thought through plan such as the IRP, what do expect Labour politicians to do?

It's a bit difficult to not oppose a government that has screwed up in pretty much every policy area.

It pains me to say it but the IRP is not all bad and is a more coherent attempt at a rail strategy than Labour produced in 13 years of Blair/Brown government.

Sorry but there is more to opposition than "The Tories are wrong on this. Sorry, what was the question again?" Constructive opposition is much more fruitful and much more likely to get Governments to change tack.

Burnham is mayor of GM. Among his duties are running GM Police which he is making a complete and utter mess of. Just one example..........

If he spent less time auditioning for his next job and more time actually doing his current job, I would have slightly more time for him. That said, in my opinion he is no more suitable for PM than the current idiot.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In the area we are interested - transport investment, Keir has been completely clear on what his alternative would be - build HS2 and NPR in full. And he's right.
But it's true, Boris does say what he will do. Then doesn't do it.

But Starmer would also have a Chancellor who said "so far and no further", like Denis Healey, and even Gordon Brown or Alistair Darling.
Labour has cancelled all sorts of things because of the budget implications (channel tunnel 1975 etc).
Rishi probably said "£100 billion max, do what you can with that". Doing HS2 East probably meant no NPR (or TRU).

 

[WatcherZero]

Some people seem to be mistaking TftN for a Local Transport Authority and complaining it doesnt improve their local services.
Thats completely out of their remit, their function is to co-ordinate regional strategy across all transport modes and co-ordinate schemes that span multiple LTA's. If you just want an extra hourly service on your local line thats the job of your LTA.

 

[domcoop7]

I agree there is a huge need to get the normal day to day things resolved - bus regulation being the prime example, and also ticketing systems. But this is precisely what the metro mayors are clamouring for. West Yorkshire was promised powers over buses. The new Mayor has done everything she can to put this in place but the government is still forcing a ludicrously dragged-out consultation which will only conclude in 2024.

You mean somebody who has been in office for a whole 6 months doesn't get to override legislation passed by Parliament (the Bus Services Act 2017 - passed by a Tory government in case you were interested) just "because"??? Well that's clearly the government's fault, isn't it.

In the area we are interested - transport investment, Keir has been completely clear on what his alternative would be - build HS2 and NPR in full. And he's right.

But most people don't really believe that. Even if I'm going to be as fair minded and neutral as I can be, I can see no evidence whatosever that Keir in particular, or the Labour opposition in general have a coherent strategy for the railways.

(I'll pause to note here that Keir Starmer ignored his own party's whip to vote against the HS2 Bill in Parliament, and delivered petitions against the line being built).

Not having a detailed plan isn't necessarily unreasonable, being as they are the opposition although if they want to criticise they should know what their alternative is. However, they don't. What that means is that were they to go into government, "build NPR in full" - if that indeed is the Labour policy - is meaningless. Build what? Where? To what timescales? With what budget? And most sensible people know, from experience if nothing else, that what this means is a Labour government would commission a review. Probably headed by Adonis. And if that review came back and said the cost of the eastern leg outweighs the benefits, then they wouldn't build it any more than the Tories would.

It's politicking, but not very good politicking, by a man who doesn't seem to have the gravitas to get away with it. He's persuading some (but not all) of his own side, and that's about it!

A Google search for "Keir Starmer Northern Powerhouse Rail" and a similar search for "Keir Starmer HS2" shows a single news article dated more than five days ago, in which he said, in York on the 14th October 2021, "I’m now here at York station which is at the centre of Northern Powerhouse Rail and absolutely important on the HS2 Eastern leg." and went on to say "Labour is fully committed to HS2, particularly the Northern Eastern wing of it. We will work with local leaders, with mayors and with communities to make it work for Yorkshire". That's it. He's never cared before or since (until the chance to score points on the IPR came up).

Burnham is mayor of GM. Among his duties are running GM Police which he is making a complete and utter mess of. Just one example..........

If he spent less time auditioning for his next job and more time actually doing his current job, I would have slightly more time for him. That said, in my opinion he is no more suitable for PM than the current idiot.

My view of him has varied over the years, but I've turned off him in the last 18 months big style. The silly theatrics over lockdown funding did it for me. And him saying this is a bad plan for Manchester (when in reality other than Birmingham, Manchester is the place that benefits the most) is just disingenuous. He's also Tweeted deliberately misleading things about bus franchising (including once agreeing that he was taking "buses back into the public sector", which of course he isn't). And only a few weeks ago, when he did his version of the perennial "OMG aren't trains so expensive you could get a flight to New York / villa in Marbella / travel in London for six month for the price of that ticket", people in the replies pointed out his errors. One of his supporters Tweeted "look at all the train sh*ggers [trying to argue with you]" (those exact words) which he replied to and agreed with. Not only juvenile, but demonstrates even if he's wrong he isn't in the slightest bit interested in correcting himself.

So it is no surprise whatsoever that Transport for the North is going to be directed towards the personal agendas of the politicians and away from the role they were set up to do. In which case why would anybody expect the government to hand them more money?

 

[quantinghome]

But Starmer would also have a Chancellor who said "so far and no further", like Denis Healey, and even Gordon Brown or Alistair Darling.
Labour has cancelled all sorts of things because of the budget implications (channel tunnel 1975 etc).
Rishi probably said "£100 billion max, do what you can with that". Doing HS2 East probably meant no NPR (or TRU).

That may have been true in the past, but let's look at what Labour are saying now: "I think putting a cap on investment, as the government has, is a false economy. It’s a cap on ambition and a cap on productivity." Keir Starmer yesterday. You can run a tight ship and not impose artificial limits on investment. They are not mutually exclusive.

I agree that's probably what Sunak said. But it's a ridiculous thing to say. HS2 eastern leg is either worth doing or not. If a government is insistent on imposing an annual budget cap on investment spending then build it in phases. Or get a grip on the gross levels of inflation seen in the project. Or redirect from some of the vastly expensive road schemes they are pushing through.

Cancelling the eastern leg and stopping NPR in the middle of the pennines are political choices, not the result of some insurmountable law of nature.

But most people don't really believe that. Even if I'm going to be as fair minded and neutral as I can be, I can see no evidence whatosever that Keir in particular, or the Labour opposition in general have a coherent strategy for the railways.

Labour do have a coherent strategy for rail - it was more or less lifted wholesale by the Tories when they announced the formation of GBR (with added sops to the private sector). Have you been following what Tan Dhesi has been saying? He clearly 'gets' rail.

If I may make a general point, there seems to be a pervasive air of resignation in the country - "the Tories are terrible but no one else could do a better job", and it's wrong on two counts. Firstly, it lets the Tories completely off the hook - they are without a shadow of a doubt the worst government in my lifetime and the sooner they are replaced the better. And secondly, it's a view which studiously ignores doing any kind of objective assessment of comparative achievements of Tory and Labour governments over the last 30 years. Of course we can point to some significant failings of any government, but taking an overarching view on economic performance and investment, Labour is clearly streets ahead. But clearly Labour have a significant job to persuade voters of this, if comments on here are anything to go by.

(Note to mods - I appreciate this thread is straying off the original point. Happy for it to be moved to the general discussion sub-forum)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Nov 2021 ==

You mean somebody who has been in office for a whole 6 months doesn't get to override legislation passed by Parliament (the Bus Services Act 2017 - passed by a Tory government in case you were interested) just "because"??? Well that's clearly the government's fault, isn't it.

I was responding to the objection that the Metro mayors aren't getting on with the job of day to day improvements in transport. I was pointing out that they are constrained from doing so by government red tape. And yes you're right, evidently that's due to government bus legislation which still fails to give Metro Mayors in other cities the powers that TfL has over buses. And yes, that clearly is the government's fault. If they had any interest in allowing local leaders to improve local transport they would pass legislation giving Metro Mayors those powers. They could gain cross party agreement to do so allowing the legislation to pass through parliament quickly.

 

[CdBrux]

Cancelling the eastern leg and stopping NPR in the middle of the pennines are political choices, not the result of some insurmountable law of nature.

If, in particular for NPR (and I would argue that NPR effectively gets close to Dewsbury which to my mind is not middle of pennines) the next government looked at building the TfN route via Bradford and found it still had a BCR much <1, are they not then open to accusations of misuse of public money / pork barrel politics?

I would imagine, for example, a few billion spent on a Leeds / West Yorkshire rapid transit system if probably much more efficient use of resources, in which I include supply chain capacity, and much more directly beneficial to many people, than a new build line from say Ravensthorpe or Marsden via Bradford to Leeds. Concentrate agglomeration in 2 areas:

• Liverpool & Manchester regions - facilitated by:
  • NPR for faster city to city connections and release of capacity on existing lines for local connections especially Manchester
  • Expanding Merseyrail as previously announced to enlarge travel to work area for Liverpool
• Leeds (WYCA) area facilitated by a mass transit scheme

Then link better together those two regions and I would say the scheme announced is pretty decent and superb if you are Huddersfield. Of course could always be better, as can anything. Then link those regions better to Birmingham, London, North East, Sheffield. This is patchier in particular for Leeds and especially Sheffield. However by boosting West York agglomeration that can in future improve the BCR for better inter regional links to and from it to a point where they are more investable.

 

[mpthomson]

I would recommend taking a look at the CBI speeches given today.

In the area we are interested - transport investment, Keir has been completely clear on what his alternative would be - build HS2 and NPR in full. And he's right.

But it's true, Boris does say what he will do. Then doesn't do it.


Of course it does. Any senior politician is going to have ambitions to lead. If the person in question has obvious leadership abilities, why would that be a bad thing? And any politician from any party is going to criticise their opponents and put forward their own perspective. Labour have always done this. So have the Tories. It's hardly unusual, indeed it's essential if you want government policy to be scrutinised. I really don't see what Andy's done as being out of order.

When the Tories come out with such a badly thought through plan such as the IRP, what do expect Labour politicians to do?

It's a bit difficult to not oppose a government that has screwed up in pretty much every policy area.

Starmer's a hypocrite.... He's campaigned against HS2 tirelessly throughout his time as a constituency MP. The only reason he's changed his mind now is so he can criticise the government over their decision without being in a position of having to do what he'd like and therefore cost it. If they'd chosen to build the whole thing he'd have found some reason to criticise that as well.

Labour desperately needs a leader that can say what they will do (and in a costed manner, see this morning's media round farce regarding social care) and that isn't simply the opposite of what the govt have said, .

 

[Wolfie]

You mean somebody who has been in office for a whole 6 months doesn't get to override legislation passed by Parliament (the Bus Services Act 2017 - passed by a Tory government in case you were interested) just "because"??? Well that's clearly the government's fault, isn't it.

But most people don't really believe that. Even if I'm going to be as fair minded and neutral as I can be, I can see no evidence whatosever that Keir in particular, or the Labour opposition in general have a coherent strategy for the railways.

(I'll pause to note here that Keir Starmer ignored his own party's whip to vote against the HS2 Bill in Parliament, and delivered petitions against the line being built).

Not having a detailed plan isn't necessarily unreasonable, being as they are the opposition although if they want to criticise they should know what their alternative is. However, they don't. What that means is that were they to go into government, "build NPR in full" - if that indeed is the Labour policy - is meaningless. Build what? Where? To what timescales? With what budget? And most sensible people know, from experience if nothing else, that what this means is a Labour government would commission a review. Probably headed by Adonis. And if that review came back and said the cost of the eastern leg outweighs the benefits, then they wouldn't build it any more than the Tories would.

It's politicking, but not very good politicking, by a man who doesn't seem to have the gravitas to get away with it. He's persuading some (but not all) of his own side, and that's about it!

A Google search for "Keir Starmer Northern Powerhouse Rail" and a similar search for "Keir Starmer HS2" shows a single news article dated more than five days ago, in which he said, in York on the 14th October 2021, "I’m now here at York station which is at the centre of Northern Powerhouse Rail and absolutely important on the HS2 Eastern leg." and went on to say "Labour is fully committed to HS2, particularly the Northern Eastern wing of it. We will work with local leaders, with mayors and with communities to make it work for Yorkshire". That's it. He's never cared before or since (until the chance to score points on the IPR came up).


My view of him has varied over the years, but I've turned off him in the last 18 months big style. The silly theatrics over lockdown funding did it for me. And him saying this is a bad plan for Manchester (when in reality other than Birmingham, Manchester is the place that benefits the most) is just disingenuous. He's also Tweeted deliberately misleading things about bus franchising (including once agreeing that he was taking "buses back into the public sector", which of course he isn't). And only a few weeks ago, when he did his version of the perennial "OMG aren't trains so expensive you could get a flight to New York / villa in Marbella / travel in London for six month for the price of that ticket", people in the replies pointed out his errors. One of his supporters Tweeted "look at all the train sh*ggers [trying to argue with you]" (those exact words) which he replied to and agreed with. Not only juvenile, but demonstrates even if he's wrong he isn't in the slightest bit interested in correcting himself.

So it is no surprise whatsoever that Transport for the North is going to be directed towards the personal agendas of the politicians and away from the role they were set up to do. In which case why would anybody expect the government to hand them more money?

Lots of this reads rather like a Conservative Central Office press briefing.

You are aware l assume that Kier Starmer is the MP for Holborn & St Pancras which covers Euston? You are further aware that he has to represent his constituent's interests? HS2 might be beneficial nationally but it undoubtedly is negative for the area around Euston. Are you really saying that Starmer should have just ignored that?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Nov 2021 ==

Starmer's a hypocrite.... He's campaigned against HS2 tirelessly throughout his time as a constituency MP. The only reason he's changed his mind now is so he can criticise the government over their decision without being in a position of having to do what he'd like and therefore cost it. If they'd chosen to build the whole thing he'd have found some reason to criticise that as well.

Labour desperately needs a leader that can say what they will do (and in a costed manner, see this morning's media round farce regarding social care) and that isn't simply the opposite of what the govt have said, .

Oh Lord, looks like l have to address politics 101...

Has it occurred to you that Starmer has recognised that HS2 Phase 1, with its damage to his constituency, is a done deal? Has it further occurred to you that a party leader has to represent the national and not just his constituency interests? The role of the opposition is, as is implicit in the name, fundamentally to oppose. However such opposition has to be considered and measured. Finally, given that the opposition doesn't have access to HMT's books they will never deliver fully costed options. That is a basic reality.

 

[quantinghome]

If, in particular for NPR (and I would argue that NPR effectively gets close to Dewsbury which to my mind is not middle of pennines) the next government looked at building the TfN route via Bradford and found it still had a BCR much <1, are they not then open to accusations of misuse of public money / pork barrel politics?

Only if you ignore the two-track section between Marsden and Huddersfield. Which is a very obvious bottleneck.

BCR just doesn't work like that. It's very bad at predicting future benefits for transformational projects - for example the BCR for the Jubilee line extension to docklands was less than 1.

I would imagine, for example, a few billion spent on a Leeds / West Yorkshire rapid transit system if probably much more efficient use of resources, in which I include supply chain capacity, and much more directly beneficial to many people, than a new build line from say Ravensthorpe or Marsden via Bradford to Leeds. Concentrate agglomeration in 2 areas:

• Liverpool & Manchester regions - facilitated by:
  • NPR for faster city to city connections and release of capacity on existing lines for local connections especially Manchester
  • Expanding Merseyrail as previously announced to enlarge travel to work area for Liverpool
• Leeds (WYCA) area facilitated by a mass transit scheme

Then link better together those two regions and I would say the scheme announced is pretty decent and superb if you are Huddersfield. Of course could always be better, as can anything. Then link those regions better to Birmingham, London, North East, Sheffield. This is patchier in particular for Leeds and especially Sheffield. However by boosting West York agglomeration that can in future improve the BCR for better inter regional links to and from it to a point where they are more investable.

Good luck doing that while still mixing long distance and local rail services. A prime example is the government's plan to electrify and run fast services between Leeds and Bradford Interchange. That eliminates any chance of the line being used for metro-frequency local services with more local stations added to the current two.

Your idea would also effectively abandon the rationale for NPR which is to agglomerate the entire M62 corridor into a single economic unit and provide a true counterweight to the south-east.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Has it occurred to you that Starmer has recognised that HS2 Phase 1, with its damage to his constituency, is a done deal? Has it further occurred to you that a party leader has to represent the national and not just his constituency interests? The role of the opposition is, as is implicit in the name, fundamentally to oppose.

And thus is the problem with our politics. Sometimes there is a need for consensus, too. The incumbent Government is not always wrong, and opposition is more about analysing whether they are or not, and proposing constructive alternatives if they are, rather than blind down-shouting as Starmer engages in.

He's too much of a lawyer - the way he is acting (including on HS2) is the way a lawyer defends their client even if they know full well they are guilty. He's the wrong man for the job.

 

[quantinghome]

Has it occurred to you that Starmer has recognised that HS2 Phase 1, with its damage to his constituency, is a done deal? Has it further occurred to you that a party leader has to represent the national and not just his constituency interests? The role of the opposition is, as is implicit in the name, fundamentally to oppose. However such opposition has to be considered and measured. Finally, given that the opposition doesn't have access to HMT's books they will never deliver fully costed options. That is a basic reality.

No politician is allowed to change their mind, apparently.

 

[urbophile]

The Secretary of State for Transport clearly had little 'respect' for 'Transport for the North': he made two mentions of it in his speech, neither was particularly complimentary:

Integrated Rail Plan: North and Midlands - Hansard - UK Parliament

Hansard record of the item : ' Integrated Rail Plan: North and Midlands' on Thursday 18 November 2021.

hansard.parliament.uk

I didn't see a mention of Liverpool either. We might as well be our own independent republic since Tory England treats us with such contempt.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I didn't see a mention of Liverpool either. We might as well be our own independent republic since Tory England treats us with such contempt.

Oh, behave. Why does Liverpool have this complex? I'm from there and I don't get it. There are cities that are treated far worse - as someone else pointed out it's the only city in the UK to have a fully electrified railway from its centre (it's even beaten London to that*), and only one of 3 in England to have a proper underground system (one in 4 in the whole UK). It will receive two HS2 trains per hour which is plenty of capacity given that the "peninsular" location limits its useful hinterland. I just don't get what the problem is.

* Yes I know there are DMU routes that continue beyond the wires, but it still does pretty well in comparison with Manchester, which outside of Metrolink has an appalling local rail network.

 

[mpthomson]

Oh Lord, looks like l have to address politics 101...

Has it occurred to you that Starmer has recognised that HS2 Phase 1, with its damage to his constituency, is a done deal? Has it further occurred to you that a party leader has to represent the national and not just his constituency interests? The role of the opposition is, as is implicit in the name, fundamentally to oppose. However such opposition has to be considered and measured. Finally, given that the opposition doesn't have access to HMT's books they will never deliver fully costed options. That is a basic reality.

And as a result his position is compromised as everyone knows that he doesn't actually believe in what he's campaigning for. Boris has similar problems regarding Heathrow's 3rd runway.

Starmer has had policy flip flop issues throughout his leadership. Bletchleyite is right.

 

[quantinghome]

Sometimes there is a need for consensus, too. The incumbent Government is not always wrong, and opposition is more about analysing whether they are or not, and proposing constructive alternatives if they are, rather than blind down-shouting as Starmer engages in.

He's too much of a lawyer - the way he is acting (including on HS2) is the way a lawyer defends their client even if they know full well they are guilty. He's the wrong man for the job.

There are many people out there complaining that Starmer is doing the exact opposite of what you are saying - that he has failed to oppose the government sufficiently.

But anyway, let's talk about consensus. HS2 has been remarkable in that it has achieved a genuine cross-party consensus through its development. The opposition has supported the government as the plans developed and went through parliament. But Johnson and Sunak have just ripped that consensus to shreds.

They have been signalling this for months, giving the opposition plenty of time to analyse whether scrapping the eastern leg and only building NPR halfway is the right decision. They (Labour) have come to the conclusion that it's a bad idea. And they are right. The IPR is an absolute dog's breakfast and Labour is absolutely right to oppose it and support building HS2 and NPR in full instead.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

* Yes I know there are DMU routes that continue beyond the wires, but it still does pretty well in comparison with Manchester, which outside of Metrolink has an appalling local rail network.

Have you seen the size of the Manchester Metrolink network and the areas served by it. Three former local rail lines, Bury to Manchester, Altrincham to Manchester and the Manchester, Oldham and Rochdale line, are now part of that network.

 

[Roast Veg]

Labour do have a coherent strategy for rail - it was more or less lifted wholesale by the Tories when they announced the formation of GBR (with added sops to the private sector). Have you been following what Tan Dhesi has been saying? He clearly 'gets' rail.

You can thank a lack of media attention for that going swiftly under the radar. Hardly anything makes it past the press, good or bad, about the Labour party right now, no doubt because the media haven't got any caricatures for them.

Only if you ignore the two-track section between Marsden and Huddersfield. Which is a very obvious bottleneck.

This section will be a mix of two and three track, as far as I know. It would indeed be a bottleneck otherwise.

Your idea would also effectively abandon the rationale for NPR which is to agglomerate the entire M62 corridor into a single economic unit and provide a true counterweight to the south-east.

The end result is the same, surely? In any case the strategy proposed by the IRP is the most bang-for-buck programme the government is prepared to authorize right now, and provided some of the local interventions (particularly in the WYCA) are progressed the whole corridor stands to be in a much more powerful position in 20 years.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You can thank a lack of media attention for that going swiftly under the radar. Hardly anything makes it past the press, good or bad, about the Labour party right now, no doubt because the media haven't got any caricatures for them.

.....whereas when Corbyn was at the helm of the good ship Momentum, the press had a ready-made target.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Have you seen the size of the Manchester Metrolink network and the areas served by it. Three former local rail lines, Bury to Manchester, Altrincham to Manchester and the Manchester, Oldham and Rochdale line, are now part of that network.

The Merseyrail Electrics network is a bit bigger and most would argue quite a lot better, of course. And unlike Metrolink, eats up operating subsidy, which can't be disregarded in this discussion.

 

[Bald Rick]

Only if you ignore the two-track section between Marsden and Huddersfield. Which is a very obvious bottleneck.

But that is only if you ignore that Marsden to Huddersfield will be 3/4 track under the NPR proposals, and indeed will almost certainly be so well before the new line is completed.

BCR just doesn't work like that. It's very bad at predicting future benefits for transformational projects - for example the BCR for the Jubilee line extension to docklands was less than 1.

The method for calculating BCRs has been improved considerably in the 30 years since JLE was assessed. Specifically, the JLE BCR did not (and could not) take into account the wider economic benefits along the corridor, and most importantly the potential change of land use enabled by the line.

Now, however, BCRs can and do take these into account, in part as a result of the learning from JLE. The NPR BCRs do. Clearly, the opportunity for transformational land use change and the consequent economic effects is rather lower at Huddersfield / Dewsbury than Southwark / Canada Water / Canary Wharf.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are many people out there complaining that Starmer is doing the exact opposite of what you are saying - that he has failed to oppose the government sufficiently.

That was pretty much all about COVID, where he was right to go with most of what the Government was saying (and in some cases suggested going more with what Sturgeon was saying, typically stricter.

Most people complaining in that specific context were complaining that there were any measures at all.

 

[quantinghome]

The end result is the same, surely? In any case the strategy proposed by the IRP is the most bang-for-buck programme the government is prepared to authorize right now, and provided some of the local interventions (particularly in the WYCA) are progressed the whole corridor stands to be in a much more powerful position in 20 years.

Of course it's possible for a future government to change course, and I hope they do. My concern is that the consequences of the IPR mean that future options get closed off due to lack of passive provision and if route safeguarding gets removed.

But that is only if you ignore that Marsden to Huddersfield will be 3/4 track under the NPR proposals, and indeed will almost certainly be so beforehand the new line is completed.

The IPR has mentioned possibly three-tracking of that section to provide freight capacity. Have I missed a bit of the report?

 

[Roast Veg]

Of course it's possible for a future government to change course, and I hope they do. My concern is that the consequences of the IPR mean that future options get closed off due to lack of passive provision and if route safeguarding gets removed.

The safeguarding around East Midlands Parkway will of course be altered (and the old line of route direct to Toton likely lost), but given the refinement of plans from Sheffield to Leeds is ongoing I'd be very surprised if any of the presently safeguarded route to Clayton were given up until a decision had been made. All a bit academic really, since most of it is for the benefit of a new Leeds station that is unlikely to be built on the safeguarded alignment at all.

 

[matacaster]

If, in particular for NPR (and I would argue that NPR effectively gets close to Dewsbury which to my mind is not middle of pennines) the next government looked at building the TfN route via Bradford and found it still had a BCR much <1, are they not then open to accusations of misuse of public money / pork barrel politics?

I would imagine, for example, a few billion spent on a Leeds / West Yorkshire rapid transit system if probably much more efficient use of resources, in which I include supply chain capacity, and much more directly beneficial to many people, than a new build line from say Ravensthorpe or Marsden via Bradford to Leeds. Concentrate agglomeration in 2 areas:

• Liverpool & Manchester regions - facilitated by:
  • NPR for faster city to city connections and release of capacity on existing lines for local connections especially Manchester
  • Expanding Merseyrail as previously announced to enlarge travel to work area for Liverpool
• Leeds (WYCA) area facilitated by a mass transit scheme

Then link better together those two regions and I would say the scheme announced is pretty decent and superb if you are Huddersfield. Of course could always be better, as can anything. Then link those regions better to Birmingham, London, North East, Sheffield. This is patchier in particular for Leeds and especially Sheffield. However by boosting West York agglomeration that can in future improve the BCR for better inter regional links to and from it to a point where they are more investable.

As a completely unbiased opinion from a resident in Huddersfield, I agree for Huddersfield it's superb!