Guardian reporting potential NPR "formal revival"

[BrianW]

I also feel like the current version of LMR is a vanity project, too many detours and the tunnel from the airport is too long.

Electrification, new passing loops, signalling and a short east-west tunnel through Manchester city centre would be better, to act like the Thameslink of the North, serving Bolton, Salford, Tameside, Liverpool, and Leeds.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Sep 2025 ==


Oh the glider bus is a really bad idea!

Welcome to the Forum with its rich mix of opinions, and opinionated folks!

Well a fast line from Manchester to Leeds would benefit a much wider range of journeys than that.

But the Japanese experience has been yes. This is why they have been building Shinkansen in places with such low traffic densities that many of the intermediate stations don't even have loops for the platforms!

The faster journeys drive more traffic and increase revenue by more than the incremental cost, although what happens to the residual legacy railway is obviously going to be a big question mark on that.

WHY is Japan so different?

Problem in Britain is EVERYONE has an opinion, and no one has authority even to get anyting done, in a five year electoaral cycle- 'a price to be paid'. Hence short-term vanity projects that win votes to get in.

A 'vision' of a conglomeration of a number of 'northern' towns and cities with one labour matrket with a 'travel to work' area similar to London and 'the South East is a VALID ONE IF ALL WILL AGREE, and not fight each other- those old 'traditional' rivalries that gave us competing railways, 'civic pride' and all that, from which we continue to suffer.

People will travel an hour each way to work for good money in London- why not to Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Hull, York? We can debate Warrington, Wigan, lots of towns staring with a B ... etc, Hebden Bridge, Halifax, H.... same as Peterborough, Bedford, Retford, ....

 

[yorksrob]

Welcome to the Forum with its rich mix of opinions, and opinionated folks!

WHY is Japan so different?

Problem in Britain is EVERYONE has an opinion, and no one has authority even to get anyting done, in a five year electoaral cycle- 'a price to be paid'. Hence short-term vanity projects that win votes to get in.

A 'vision' of a conglomeration of a number of 'northern' towns and cities with one labour matrket with a 'travel to work' area similar to London and 'the South East is a VALID ONE IF ALL WILL AGREE, and not fight each other- those old 'traditional' rivalries that gave us competing railways, 'civic pride' and all that, from which we continue to suffer.

People will travel an hour each way to work for good money in London- why not to Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Hull, York? We can debate Warrington, Wigan, lots of towns staring with a B ... etc, Hebden Bridge, Halifax, H.... same as Peterborough, Bedford, Retford, ....

Famously, very few citizens of Japan have an opinion ......!?

 

[HSTEd]

WHY is Japan so different?

Problem in Britain is EVERYONE has an opinion, and no one has authority even to get anyting done, in a five year electoaral cycle- 'a price to be paid'. Hence short-term vanity projects that win votes to get in.

A 'vision' of a conglomeration of a number of 'northern' towns and cities with one labour matrket with a 'travel to work' area similar to London and 'the South East is a VALID ONE IF ALL WILL AGREE, and not fight each other- those old 'traditional' rivalries that gave us competing railways, 'civic pride' and all that, from which we continue to suffer.

People will travel an hour each way to work for good money in London- why not to Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Hull, York? We can debate Warrington, Wigan, lots of towns staring with a B ... etc, Hebden Bridge, Halifax, H.... same as Peterborough, Bedford, Retford, ....

Well the NIMBY lobby is different to the UK, but it is extremely powerful.

Just look at the now axed Narita Shinkansen for an example of their power!

I think the more likely result is that Japanese railways remain traditional vertically integrated enterprises, as well as being involved in numerous ancillary activities near their stations, including property development, retail and the like.
A vertically integrated railway can more affordably keep in house capabilities around without falling victim to the vagaries of contract driven accounting.

In that environment, infrastructure spending to replace operational spending is much more feasible than it is in a system where the status quo is entrenched in an enormously complex network of contracts and legal relationships. Ultimately noone is truly in control of the National Rail system in the same way that the board is in charge of JR East (for example).

Even in the nationalised era in the UK, the British Railways Board regularly obtained acts of parliament with powers for its benefit.

 

[eldomtom2]

I think the more likely result is that Japanese railways remain traditional vertically integrated enterprises, as well as being involved in numerous ancillary activities near their stations, including property development, retail and the like.
A vertically integrated railway can more affordably keep in house capabilities around without falling victim to the vagaries of contract driven accounting.

Not when it comes to the Shinkansen! They are built and owned by the government agency JRTT and leased to the private JR companies. The only Shinkansen lines owned by the JR companies themselves are those that had been completed before privatisation. In addition, the Hokkaido Shinkansen at least does not make enough revenue to cover its operating expenses.

 

[yorksrob]

Well the NIMBY lobby is different to the UK, but it is extremely powerful.

Just look at the now axed Narita Shinkansen for an example of their power!

I think the more likely result is that Japanese railways remain traditional vertically integrated enterprises, as well as being involved in numerous ancillary activities near their stations, including property development, retail and the like.
A vertically integrated railway can more affordably keep in house capabilities around without falling victim to the vagaries of contract driven accounting.

In that environment, infrastructure spending to replace operational spending is much more feasible than it is in a system where the status quo is entrenched in an enormously complex network of contracts and legal relationships. Ultimately noone is truly in control of the National Rail system in the same way that the board is in charge of JR East (for example).

Even in the nationalised era in the UK, the British Railways Board regularly obtained acts of parliament with powers for its benefit.

"In house capabilities" is the key.

Gerry Fiennes once said "when you reorganise, you bleed" (or words to that effect).

Nowadays one might say "when you re-procure, you bleed".

Procurement is a necessary evil for many things, but a national railway system should be big enough to do its own stuff.

 

[grove]

This is an interesting discussion since Wednesday (24/09/2025), based on a speculative article by the BBC. There does not appear to have been a ministerial statement or DfT announcement. It seems more of a response to political 'threats' to potential contractors.

 

[HSTEd]

Not when it comes to the Shinkansen! They are built and owned by the government agency JRTT and leased to the private JR companies. The only Shinkansen lines owned by the JR companies themselves are those that had been completed before privatisation.

I suppose, but the JR companies continue to support Shinkansen construction on their turf, which I don't think they would do unless it improved their position!
Ofcourse the basket case JR companies like JR Kyushu remain owned by the JRTT in any case.

In addition, the Hokkaido Shinkansen at least does not make enough revenue to cover its operating expenses.

The Hokkaido Shinkansen isn't actually finished yet, so we shall have to see what happens when it reaches Sapporo.

Also I did say that Shinkansens allowed a net increase of revenue, not that they operated at a net surplus.
The Hokkaido Shinkansen likely saved a lot of money by allowing the parallel conventional railway services that haemmorhaged even more money to be axed.

EDIT:

After all, the completion of the remaining section of the Hokkaido Shinkansen is going to outright close 140km of route (between Otaru and Oshamambe) on the Hakodate Main Line alongside the sections of the former Esashi Line that have already been cut.

 

[eldomtom2]

I suppose, but the JR companies continue to support Shinkansen construction on their turf, which I don't think they would do unless it improved their position!

Well, when the government is forking out, it's unsurprising that they'll support it. Since "parallel conventional lines" are usually transferred from the JR company to a "third-sector" company subsided by local government, the Shinkansen construction is not cutting subsidies overall, just shifting them around (and probably increasing them because the conventional lines can no longer be cross-subsided from profitable JR lines).

The Hokkaido Shinkansen likely saved a lot of money by allowing the parallel conventional railway services that haemmorhaged even more money to be axed.

Relatively few services were axed by the Hokkaido Shinkansen - just the through narrow-gauge passenger services.

 

[HSTEd]

Well, when the government is forking out, it's unsurprising that they'll support it. Since "parallel conventional lines" are usually transferred from the JR company to a "third-sector" company subsided by local government, the Shinkansen construction is not cutting subsidies overall, just shifting them around (and probably increasing them because the conventional lines can no longer be cross-subsided from profitable JR lines).

Relatively few services were axed by the Hokkaido Shinkansen - just the through narrow-gauge passenger services.

Only just under half the Esashi line transferred to the third sector operator (South Hokkaido Railway Company) on the opening of the Hokkaido Shinkansen.

~42 route kilometres simply closed between Kikonai and Esashi, judging by Google Earth that segment was simply not considered very valuable.
Even the bulk of the remainder is only operated at a low traffic density, with hourly on about 9km of route, and two-hourly on the remaining ~25km.

I don't have a timetable from 2016, but it seems unlikely to me that the service density was anything like that sparse. Interestingly despite the route being electrified for use by JR Freight trains, South Hokkaido only operate diesel units?

In any case, JR Hokkaido was able to reduce its losses substantially by axing these routes. Local government decided to partially rescue it, but that is ultimately not JR Hokkaido's problem.

However that is all wandering off topic.

 

[Richard123]

The problem is not the consultancies -contractors wouldn’t know where to start without professional services. Designs (by consultants) in Italy and Spain are much more mature before budget numbers are published. The real problem is the UK Treasury’s obsession with a flawed BCR process.

That's not universally true: design and build contracts from functional specification have been adopted highly successfully.

Design in these cases is done by the organisation with delivery experience, who also hold almost all risk, with stagegates mainly at completion.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I note this thread has the Guardian in its title when started quite some time ago, so has that same newspaper made any very recent updated comment on matters as how they stand at this point in time?

 

[eldomtom2]

Only just under half the Esashi line transferred to the third sector operator (South Hokkaido Railway Company) on the opening of the Hokkaido Shinkansen.

~42 route kilometres simply closed between Kikonai and Esashi, judging by Google Earth that segment was simply not considered very valuable.

That segment closed before the opening of the Hokkaido Shinkansen. Its closure was not due to the Shinkansen's opening.

Even the bulk of the remainder is only operated at a low traffic density, with hourly on about 9km of route, and two-hourly on the remaining ~25km.

I don't have a timetable from 2016, but it seems extraordinarily unlikely that the service density was anything like that sparse.

No, the local services were always that sparse (Timetable World has a 1999 timetable if you wish to check). The only services cut were the roughly ten per day narrow-gauge expresses.

In any case, JR Hokkaido was able to reduce its losses substantially by axing these routes. Local government decided to partially rescue it, but that is ultimately not JR Hokkaido's problem.

But all that is actually being accomplished there is shifting the burden for subsidies from national to local government.

That's not universally true: design and build contracts from functional specification have been adopted highly successfully.

Design in these cases is done by the organisation with delivery experience, who also hold almost all risk, with stagegates mainly at completion.

I have heard some people (e.g. Alon Levy) be very critical of design-build and promote design-bid-build (i.e. design and construction are contracted out separately).

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a gentle reminder that this thread is for the discussion of "Northern Powerhouse Rail".

thanks

 

[Palmerston]

Does anyone know if NPR (or indeed HS2) got any mentions at the Labour conference?

 

[Xavi]

That's not universally true: design and build contracts from functional specification have been adopted highly successfully.

Design in these cases is done by the organisation with delivery experience, who also hold almost all risk, with stagegates mainly at completion.

I agree, D&B can be successful where you have a refined scope and a uncomplicated site; it is not suitable for complex projects with immature designs / scope e.g., HS2.

For any D&B contract, it is very rare indeed for a D&B contractor to deliver all of the design. Contractors normally subcontract the design to professional consultancies, pass down the design risk and get paid a Fee on this design cost.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Does anyone know if NPR (or indeed HS2) got any mentions at the Labour conference?

There were implications made that certain matters of state needed budgetery action taking that would not be pleasant

 

[3RDGEN]

Does anyone know if NPR (or indeed HS2) got any mentions at the Labour conference?

The Chancellor made comment in her speech;

"https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...hel-reeves-makes-northern-powerhouse-32572781" -

Rachel Reeves makes Northern Powerhouse Rail promise during conference speech - Rachel Reeves insists Labour will 'push ahead' with Northern Powerhouse Rail.​

Speaking at Labour conference, Ms Reeves said: "As well as the Transpennine route upgrade to link Manchester, Leeds and York and the towns in between them, this Labour Government will push ahead with our plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail.

"Plans never delivered by the Conservatives, plans opposed by Reform, but backed by this Labour Government.

"A vote of confidence in the north of England to get people to work, to connect families, to create jobs and to build build prosperity in towns and cities scarred by underinvestment for far too long.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In "politic-speak", when Government ministers say they will "push ahead" with their plans, that is an easy way of being non-committal regarding the provision of starting dates for projects.

 

[HSTEd]

That more or less seems to sound like "We will push ahead with the project to the minimum degree possible to generate positive headlines from time to time, as required by our political position".

 

[BrianW]

The Chancellor made comment in her speech;

... and Secretary of State for Transport Heidi Alexander:

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

... and Secretary of State for Transport Heidi Alexander:

When she talked about buses under deregulation, she made no mention of the new Bee Network and the threatened strikes threatened that will affect Stagecoach Manchester, First Manchester and that interloper from "darn sarf", Metroline and how that will affect members of the travelling public. I cannot recall when the Bee Network was being launched, mention of possible strike action occurring under the new regime.

 

[3RDGEN]

So all we got was "fully committed" and "we will push ahead", so basically dead in the water. There's no money for NPR and no political desire to promote it given the farce of HS2, maybe before the next election it will get rolled out again.

 

[Palmerston]

... and Secretary of State for Transport Heidi Alexander:

For anyone who can't be bothered to watch this, she also promised the Newcastle metro will be extended to Washington, the Midland Metro to east Birmingham and a rapid transit system for Liverpool. "Fully committed" to NPR. Promised a new station at Haxby, plus Portishead and Pill. Not sure how much, if any, of this is new.