East West Rail: Bedford - Cambridge will it ever get built?

[The Planner]

So, here's my suggestion. Put a note in your diary, and in 10 years, if neither XC not WCML have used EWR to divert in that period, I will send both of you a crisp £10. On the other hand, if any time before then they do, please send me £10... We can agree to disagree for now.

Easiest tenner I will make in a long time.

 

[fishwomp]

Easiest tenner I will make in a long time.

Well, you get the next 18 months as pretty certain.. but let's see about the following 8.5 years.. just one diversion

 

[A0]

As a line from Oxford to Milton Keynes, it will be very useful. It will offer more and faster journey options for Oxford area to Manchester and Scotland. That is until HS2 stops Milton Keynes being called at by those services or reduces them to stoppers. It also adds resilience to classic WCML, and XC routes by diversion options.

Except it won't.

As The Planner has pointed out Oxford - MK will be 45 mins.

Current Oxford - Manchester direct is 2h 44m

MK - Manchester is ~1 h 40m.

So unless you get a perfect 5-10min connection it'll be no better than the present and possibly worse.

For Scotland most of the services from MK are the via Birmingham ones - it'll be miles quicker to go Oxford to Birmingham direct than Oxford-MK-Birmingham.

 

[fishwomp]

As The Planner has pointed out Oxford - MK will be 45 mins.
Current Oxford - Manchester direct is 2h 44m
MK - Manchester is ~1 h 40m.
So unless you get a perfect 5-10min connection it'll be no better than the present and possibly worse.

Crikey, is this the glass always half-empty forum? Did you really mean to write "unless (it's better) it'll be no better and possibly worse"!?

A half-hourly service means that there is a 1 in 3 chance one of the two per hour is arriving between 15 and 5 mins before the hourly Manchester service (thus getting same or faster journey time and a minimum 5 min connection) - depending on the timetable in 2024 which hasn't been written yet. Yep, sounds like a possible option - but we don't know! Equally, it also likely leaves at a different time to the XC and so is an option depending on when you set foot on the platform.

Here's three more reasons why I think it's more likely than not to be showing often as an option in NRE..

1. Pre-covid - half the Manchester journeys would require a change at Brum - similar connections issue there, journey time obviously longer than no changes. (Now it's 1 XC per hour to Birmingham which utterly sucks, but I assume that gets fixed sooner than Oxf-MKC opens).

2. Even with pre-covid service - not everyone wants to leave at 7 or 39 minutes past the hour..

3. In the evenings, even pre-covid, Brum to Oxford quickly shrank to one per hour - 9:06pm then 10:06pm. Potential to get something mid-way between those times via MKC can't be ruled out.

Also - similar vein.. The late evening XC also sucks (and did pre-covid) for services from Yorkshire, arriving at Brum a few mins after the 9pm or 10pm southbound to Oxford. One of the options in NRE for 7.30pm dep from Sheffield to Oxford is actually routed via Leicester, Nuneaton, Leamington .. and it achieves same journey time as taking the XC and changing at Brum at 7pm.. Will be interesting if - post Bedford - Bletchley improvements - they recast MML to stop more services at Bedford.

For Scotland most of the services from MK are the via Birmingham ones - it'll be miles quicker to go Oxford to Birmingham direct than Oxford-MK-Birming

Mostly - right, I agree - but it always depends on when you travel and where you travel to.. the 17.41 ex-Milton Keynes to Glasgow (1x per day is direct over the Trent Valley) and takes 4h29.

The only direct BHM to Glasgow on WCML takes 4h02 at 19:15 (others take 4h20-4h40 with connections in Preston) - so 5h30-6h with connection time from Oxford - which is OK.. but if I'm leaving Oxford at 4.45pm and want to get to Glasgow .. that's around 5h30, when the other route is 6h at that time..!

So yeh, we don't know, but in 2024, it'll be an option - and I reckon it'll be suggested quite a few times on Nat Rail Enquiries!

 

[The Planner]

A half-hourly service means that there is a 1 in 3 chance one of the two per hour is arriving between 15 and 5 mins before the hourly Manchester service (thus getting same or faster journey time and a minimum 5 min connection) - depending on the timetable in 2024 which hasn't been written yet. Yep, sounds like a possible option - but we don't know! Equally, it also likely leaves at a different time to the XC and so is an option depending on when you set foot on the platform.

You'll have a good idea by the new year. The gaps for the services already exist between Denbigh Hall and MK as they have to pass each other on that stretch apparently.

 

[A0]

Crikey, is this the glass always half-empty forum? Did you really mean to write "unless (it's better) it'll be no better and possibly worse"!?

No - it's the realists versus the crayonistas usually.

A half-hourly service means that there is a 1 in 3 chance one of the two per hour is arriving between 15 and 5 mins before the hourly Manchester service (thus getting same or faster journey time and a minimum 5 min connection) - depending on the timetable in 2024 which hasn't been written yet. Yep, sounds like a possible option - but we don't know! Equally, it also likely leaves at a different time to the XC and so is an option depending on when you set foot on the platform.

Here's three more reasons why I think it's more likely than not to be showing often as an option in NRE..

1. Pre-covid - half the Manchester journeys would require a change at Brum - similar connections issue there, journey time obviously longer than no changes. (Now it's 1 XC per hour to Birmingham which utterly sucks, but I assume that gets fixed sooner than Oxf-MKC opens).

2. Even with pre-covid service - not everyone wants to leave at 7 or 39 minutes past the hour..

3. In the evenings, even pre-covid, Brum to Oxford quickly shrank to one per hour - 9:06pm then 10:06pm. Potential to get something mid-way between those times via MKC can't be ruled out.

Also - similar vein.. The late evening XC also sucks (and did pre-covid) for services from Yorkshire, arriving at Brum a few mins after the 9pm or 10pm southbound to Oxford. One of the options in NRE for 7.30pm dep from Sheffield to Oxford is actually routed via Leicester, Nuneaton, Leamington .. and it achieves same journey time as taking the XC and changing at Brum at 7pm.. Will be interesting if - post Bedford - Bletchley improvements - they recast MML to stop more services at Bedford.

But *how many* people regularly travel from Oxford to Manchester. Add in once HS2 is in place a change at Birmingham will be miles quicker than going via MK.

On point 2 - that's a 2 tph service - people might not want to leave a 7 or 39 minutes past the hour, but that's the nature of public transport - it runs to a timetable and you have to fit your plans around it, not the other way around. So whilst on some shorter, metro style journeys the frequency may be 'turn up and go' - such as parts of London Overground, parts of Merseyrail or metro systems like Manchester Metrolink, you're unlikely to ever get to that on anything else apart from one or two 'Inter City' by that I mean London to a major city, flows. So London - Birmingham, London - Manchester, London - Bristol maybe London - Leeds. Secondary city to secondary city is unlikely to ever justify more than every 30 mins.

Bit in Bold - no way. Very unlikely. This gets peddled every so often on these boards as a justification for EWR but a change to sit around at a godforsaken place like Bedford isn't attractive to passengers.

Mostly - right, I agree - but it always depends on when you travel and where you travel to.. the 17.41 ex-Milton Keynes to Glasgow (1x per day is direct over the Trent Valley) and takes 4h29.

The only direct BHM to Glasgow on WCML takes 4h02 at 19:15 (others take 4h20-4h40 with connections in Preston) - so 5h30-6h with connection time from Oxford - which is OK.. but if I'm leaving Oxford at 4.45pm and want to get to Glasgow .. that's around 5h30, when the other route is 6h at that time..!

So yeh, we don't know, but in 2024, it'll be an option - and I reckon it'll be suggested quite a few times on Nat Rail Enquiries!

Again - the number of Oxford - Scotland travellers can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand on a daily basis. That's certainly no justification to slow down the fast Anglo-Scottish services and stopping them at MKC.

 

[Bald Rick]

So, here's my suggestion. Put a note in your diary, and in 10 years, if neither XC not WCML have used EWR to divert in that period, I will send both of you a crisp £10. On the other hand, if any time before then they do, please send me £10... We can agree to disagree for now.

I’ll take that!

No way the WCML TOC will use it. And for Cross Country it’s sufficiently unlikely that an evens bet is well worth it.

Albeit £10 in 10 years time will probably only buy me a pack of Polos.

 

[fishwomp]

No - it's the realists versus the crayonistas usually

But *how many* people regularly travel from Oxford to Manchester. Add in once HS2 is in place a change at Birmingham will be miles quicker than going via MK.

So, I'm talking about a railway that opens in 2024, and you're talking about the one that - if the Manchester phase isn't cancelled - won't be open until 2035-2040? Am I allowed to suggest people might EWR for this for a decade?

I don't know how many people travel Oxf-Man, I do know that pre-covid times I did it once a month for work. There were many occasions where delays made it hard work, Stafford-Wolves had an issue etc, and that's it, you're stuck.. .

If you're at Oxford Parkway, it'll be faster via MK, and that's the nearest station for the northern part of the city..

On point 2 - that's a 2 tph service - people might not want to leave a 7 or 39 minutes past the hour, but that's the nature of public transport - it runs to a timetable and you have to fit your plans around it, not the other way around. [...]

It has a timetable - but it doesn't always run to it. I rather like having options and flexible tickets.

Bit in Bold - no way. Very unlikely. This gets peddled every so often on these boards as a justification for EWR but a change to sit around at a godforsaken place like Bedford isn't attractive to passengers.

What about the wonderful fjords.. ? New Street is far from attractive, but that doesn't stop everyone changing there..

Again - the number of Oxford - Scotland travellers can probably be counted on the fingers of one hand on a daily basis. That's certainly no justification to slow down the fast Anglo-Scottish services and stopping them at MKC.

I doubt that it is on one hand, would be great if someone had that passenger data.

 

[deltic]

I doubt that it is on one hand, would be great if someone had that passenger data.

Some ten year old data suggests it was then around a 50 a day in each direction

 

[fishwomp]

Some ten year old data suggests it was then around a 50 a day in each direction

Big hands

 

[The Planner]

Spread over a day though, Avanti will still consider the value of a 4-5 minute stop vs the benefit of picking those passengers up. On the WCML those minutes will cost substantially more than the value of the passengers whether that is the right thing or not.

 

[daodao]

With the expected austerity plan following Hunt's appointment as chancellor, I suspect that the plan to build a new EWR line between Bedford and Cambridge is as dead as a dodo.

 

[fishwomp]

With the expected austerity plan following Hunt's appointment as chancellor, I suspect that the plan to build a new EWR line between Bedford and Cambridge is as dead as a dodo.

Or just deferred - kicked to a future government. The unfortunate thing is that going half way (Sandy) just isn't helpful, so it is all or nothing. Even Bletchley - Bedford itself isn't certain for the rebuild.

Spread over a day though, Avanti will still consider the value of a 4-5 minute stop vs the benefit of picking those passengers up. On the WCML those minutes will cost substantially more than the value of the passengers whether that is the right thing or not.

Of course. I doubt that it would do it for this traffic, but the point is that existing timetable suggests this to be a decent option at some points of the day. What the timetable looks like 5 or 10 years out, I don't know.

 

[Cantab26]

With the expected austerity plan following Hunt's appointment as chancellor, I suspect that the plan to build a new EWR line between Bedford and Cambridge is as dead as a dodo.

That doesn’t necessarily follow because (a) scrapping it doesn’t actually save any money and (b) even if it did it’s capital spending whereas the need for savings is primarily on the revenue side.

 

[zwk500]

That doesn’t necessarily follow because (a) scrapping it doesn’t actually save any money and (b) even if it did it’s capital spending whereas the need for savings is primarily on the revenue side.

Unfortunately, (a) Appearances are worth more than actual success and (b) it's still funded by borrowing and that got a lot more expensive for the government recently.

 

[A0]

That doesn’t necessarily follow because (a) scrapping it doesn’t actually save any money and (b) even if it did it’s capital spending whereas the need for savings is primarily on the revenue side.

Not quite right on 'A' - if it isn't built and is stopped now, then the only work will be relatively small project closure costs. There won't be the costs of the inevitable public inquiry, planning approvals, construction and ultimately operation. Construction alone of a ~ 30 mile line at around £50m / mile will save about £1.5bn alone. If those costs were originally in the budget for spending nect year or the year after, they could be marked as savings.

 

[A0]

Of course. I doubt that it would do it for this traffic, but the point is that existing timetable suggests this to be a decent option at some points of the day. What the timetable looks like 5 or 10 years out, I don't know.

The logical thing for Anglo Scottish on the WCML post HS 2 will be to run them all via HS2. South of Birmingham most places need a change, so shift that change to Birmingham and onto HS2.

They'll be on the legacty WCML north of Manchester in any case so connections for places like Preston, Carlisle and Lancaster will be unchanged.

The legacy WCML services probably don't need to go beyond Preston / Blackpool.

 

[Magdalia]

With the expected austerity plan following Hunt's appointment as chancellor, I suspect that the plan to build a new EWR line between Bedford and Cambridge is as dead as a dodo.

I disagree. Although the financial situation has deteriorated, and borrowed money had got more expensive, the EWR eastern end is nowhere near dead yet.

I listened very carefully to the new Chancellor responding to questions after his Commons statement yesterday, especially those from his own side of the House.

The government still regards the growth agenda as high priority. The Chancellor mentioned the contribution of tech and life science industries more than once, including the contributions of our top universities. Given the current chancellor's background, he is probably more attuned to the needs of the tech and life science industries than any of his three recent predecessors, all of whom looked at growth from the City of London finance end of the telescope. This chancellor is very likely to be in post until the next General Election, whenever that may be, and whoever is Prime Minister. I'm optimistic that he will see the EWR eastern end as essential for delivering economic growth in tech and life science industries. While some capital projects may be deferred, I'd be surprised if EWR was one of them.

 

[daodao]

I disagree. Although the financial situation has deteriorated, and borrowed money had got more expensive, the EWR eastern end is nowhere near dead yet.

I listened very carefully to the new Chancellor responding to questions after his Commons statement yesterday, especially those from his own side of the House.

The government still regards the growth agenda as high priority. The Chancellor mentioned the contribution of tech and life science industries more than once, including the contributions of our top universities. Given the current chancellor's background, he is probably more attuned to the needs of the tech and life science industries than any of his three recent predecessors, all of whom looked at growth from the City of London finance end of the telescope. This chancellor is very likely to be in post until the next General Election, whenever that may be, and whoever is Prime Minister. I'm optimistic that he will see the EWR eastern end as essential for delivering economic growth in tech and life science industries. While some capital projects may be deferred, I'd be surprised if EWR was one of them.

The EWR proposals east of Bedford should be killed off. The Cambridge area does not need scarce fiscal stimuli for growth. It has overheated in recent years. Any government resources still available for growth in this time of austerity should be spent on deprived areas such as the former textile towns in the Pennine foothills, which don't require extensive greenfield housing developments.

The solution to traffic problems in the southern half of Cambridgeshire is improved park-and-ride facilities on Cambridge's outskirts, with bus services to the city centre and other key places of employment within the relatively small urban area. Rail-based schemes are inappropriate and overkill.

 

[Cantab26]

Not quite right on 'A' - if it isn't built and is stopped now, then the only work will be relatively small project closure costs. There won't be the costs of the inevitable public inquiry, planning approvals, construction and ultimately operation. Construction alone of a ~ 30 mile line at around £50m / mile will save about £1.5bn alone. If those costs were originally in the budget for spending nect year or the year after, they could be marked as savings.

They are not. If it is scrapped now then there is no saving except for the (limited) project design and development costs.

Certainly nowhere near £1.5bn.

 

[Magdalia]

The EWR proposals east of Bedford should be killed off. The Cambridge area does not need scarce fiscal stimuli for growth. It has overheated in recent years. Any government resources still available for growth in this time of austerity should be spent on deprived areas such as the former textile towns in the Pennine foothills, which don't require extensive greenfield housing developments.

Cambridge is overheating because of lack of infrastructure and housing. Growth in high tach and life science businesses is being strangled. The notion that the high tach and life science businesses will locate in the Pennine foothills instead of next to one of the top ten universities in the world is fantasy. If the UK economy is ever going to get back to 2.5% growth, then Cambridge, and places like it, need to be growing even faster than that. The Cambridge area does need scarce fiscal stimuli because economic growth needed to stabilise the public finances will be lost without it.

The solution to traffic problems in the southern half of Cambridgeshire is improved park-and-ride facilities on Cambridge's outskirts, with bus services to the city centre and other key places of employment within the relatively small urban area. Rail-based schemes are inappropriate and overkill.

No it isn't. There isn't enough road space and there aren't enough bus drivers for the level of service that would be required to link multiple park and ride sites with multiple employment nodes. Stagecoach have had to cut back the existing service because they can't recruit drivers, the notion that the bus services could be increased by 4 or 5 times is also fantasy.

 

[daodao]

Cambridge is overheating because of lack of infrastructure and housing.

The profits of the high tech companies could be used to fund some local infrastructure developments in Cambridgeshire if they wish to develop further, rather than use scarce government funds, but I doubt that such companies would wish to fund the eye-watering costs of extending EWR east of Bedford.

 

[A0]

They are not. If it is scrapped now then there is no saving except for the (limited) project design and development costs.

Certainly nowhere near £1.5bn.

You can only mark a saving against planned expenditure - so if there are budget lines for EWR in 2,3,4,5 years out and it is stopped, those costs *can* be marked as savings.

It's a perfectly normal thing to do - and exactly what I've seen in large organisations many times.

Are you saying the only planned costs at this time are "(limited) project design and development costs."

 

[zwk500]

The profits of the high tech companies could be used to fund some local infrastructure developments in Cambridgeshire if they wish to develop further, rather than use scarce government funds, but I doubt that such companies would wish to fund the eye-watering costs of extended EWR east of Bedford.

And when asked to contribute to housing and infrastructure, do you imagine those companies will stay in Cambridge and pay their share, or up sticks and move out?

 

[Magdalia]

The profits of the high tech companies could be used to fund some local infrastructure developments in Cambridgeshire if they wish to develop further, rather than use scarce government funds, but I doubt that such companies would wish to fund the eye-watering costs of extended EWR east of Bedford.

I expect private sector financing to be part of the funding of the eastern end of East West Rail, both the existing big high tech companies (eg Astra Zeneca) and the housebuilding companies with land around Cambourne and St Neots.

And when asked to contribute to housing and infrastructure, do you imagine those companies will stay in Cambridge and pay their share, or up sticks and move out?

They will stay in Cambridge, because the university isn't going anywhere else.

But the government has to do its bit too, on behalf of the businesses that don't exist yet. The way this works macroeconomically is that the infrastructure has to come first. That attracts start ups, some of which grow to be big businesses that pay lots of corporation tax, with employees that pay lots of income tax and VAT. All that tax pays off any government borrowing that helped fund EWR, with plenty left over for funding things like the NHS and pensions.

 

[InTheEastMids]

the existing big high tech companies (eg Astra Zeneca)

They will stay in Cambridge, because the university isn't going anywhere else.

Agree with most of the rest of this post, and thought I could build on this point. I agree Cambridge isn't competing with the "Pennine Foothills". However, it *is* competing with places like Boston (not the one in Lincolnshire). A company like AZ could either progressively run down its Cambridge ops over many years in favour of a better global location (or do the kind of big bang reductions/exit that they did from Loughborough, or Pfizer did from Sandwich in Kent)

Lab space shortage threatens life science boom in Oxford and Cambridge

Investors warn that lack of availability is driving some companies to US cities

www.ft.com

[Link to Financial Times about availability of lab space, and contrasts Oxford-Cambridge arc shortage with the USA]

I think the Johnson government couldn't figure out how to position Ox-Cam Arc in the context of "Levelling Up". Even though he understood it, he would have chucked it under the bus for short-term popularity.

I think Shapps' comments in July were in the context of a leadership election, and arguably playing to the party membership. He's out of government, for now at least.

The problem that PM Hunt, err Truss faces with cancelling EWR is that it's been positioned as a cornerstone of Ox-Cam Arc, which depends on having decent infrastructure. This, in turn, is part of the whole Govt growth story post-Brexit. So cancelling EWR damages that narrative too. So the question is whether the UK Government feels it can afford to risk telling the rest of the world that it's also unserious about high tech/growth business investment and high-value jobs.

 

[zwk500]

So the question is whether the UK Government feels it can afford to risk telling the rest of the world that it's also unserious about high tech/growth business investment and high-value jobs.

The government at the moment has no identifiable strategy at all, and world already knows it, so I don't think this will play into it. Truss is contradicting what Hunt says at regular opportunities, and the only other members of the cabinet daring to be seen in public are Cleverley and Braverman, either because they're too stupid/refusing to see the writing on the wall, or because they know that once Truss goes they'll never get another cabinet post.
EWR is unpopular with Tory voters in the areas of Beds and Cambs the line would be built through, and it is not too far along the project development process. I would expect Hunt to shelve it until no earlier than after the next election for these reasons.

 

[ac6000cw]

In relation to Cambridge economic development, I would point out that it already has decent rail services to the north, east, south and southwest (Royston/Hitchin/Stevenage), plus a dedicated busway to the northwest (St. Ives etc.) with a direct connection to Cambridge North station. It's only directly to the west e.g. St. Neots and Sandy where existing roads are the only available transport option to commute towards Cambridge.

When Cambridge South is open, the Cambridge area (with three stations) will be one of the best rail-connected areas in the region, even without EWR.

I think what does need to happen is a shake up of the planning process, to allow more housing development along some of the existing rail corridors/around existing stations e.g. Dullingham and Kennett (on the line to Bury) are 'out in the sticks' stations situated in farmland (although Kennett has the large Red Lodge development less than 2 miles away - it would be interesting to know how much passenger traffic that generates at Kennett station).

 

[Magdalia]

EWR is unpopular with Tory voters in the areas of Beds and Cambs the line would be built through, and it is not too far along the project development process. I would expect Hunt to shelve it until no earlier than after the next election for these reasons.

Look at what is happening with fracking, despite its unpopularity with Tory voters. EWR can also be pushed through in the same way, and it affects fewer constituencies than fracking.

One bit of news that crept under the radar recently was the appointment of Anthony Browne (MP for South Cambridgeshire) as Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Secretary of State for Transport. If the government press ahead with EWR he won't be in a position to oppose it.

So the question is whether the UK Government feels it can afford to risk telling the rest of the world that it's also unserious about high tech/growth business investment and high-value jobs.

A very good way of putting the question.

I think what does need to happen is a shake up of the planning process, to allow more housing development along some of the existing rail corridors/around existing stations e.g. Dullingham and Kennett (on the line to Bury)

The Newmarket line is of limited use for commuting because capacity is very restricted by the single line section.

(although Kennett has the large Red Lodge development less than 2 miles away - it would be interesting to know how much passenger traffic that generates at Kennett station)

Red Lodge is right next to the A11. I can remember when it was a few garages at the end of the Newmarket bypass.

 

[Trainbike46]

In relation to Cambridge economic development, I would point out that it already has decent rail services to the north, east, south and southwest (Royston/Hitchin/Stevenage), plus a dedicated busway to the northwest (St. Ives etc.) with a direct connection to Cambridge North station. It's only directly to the west e.g. St. Neots and Sandy where existing roads are the only available transport option to commute towards Cambridge.

When Cambridge South is open, the Cambridge area (with three stations) will be one of the best rail-connected areas in the region, even without EWR.

I think what does need to happen is a shake up of the planning process, to allow more housing development along some of the existing rail corridors/around existing stations e.g. Dullingham and Kennett (on the line to Bury) are 'out in the sticks' stations situated in farmland (although Kennett has the large Red Lodge development less than 2 miles away - it would be interesting to know how much passenger traffic that generates at Kennett station).

In principle I like that idea, but it would require investment to allow the Cambridge-Ipswich trains to run more frequently than the current hourly service - and given the importance of the route to freight traffic, at least maintain current capacity for freight as well