Recent content by MidlandMainlie

Could a combination of B and C be possible, ie extending HS2 to Baldwins gate (to bypass Stafford), but also building a cord to from HS2 to Hixton for Stoke on Trent and Manchester and not building the Handsacre link which would bypass the bottlenecks at Colwich Junction and Shughbrough?

The mistake was calling it HS2 in the first place and not something like the West Coast Relief Line, the latter doesn’t sound as good for marketing purposes but does more to explain to the public the need for the project to provide extra capacity. Same with renaming the Channel Tunnel Rail link...

I think you will find at even a modest traffic calm scheme will cost more than most Parish/Town Councils can affafford. Plus highways responsibilities lie with either the County Council or Unitary Authority (depending on which part of the country you are in), Parish/Town council’s have limited...

Parish and Town council's don’t have limits on how much they can increase the precepts, but their overall budgets tend to be small so any significant road schemes would need in increases of that be equal hundreds if not thousands percent of their current budgets. 1748785538

The front of Nottingham station was originally a Portico built for carriages (later taxis) to drop off/pick up passengers, it was converted into a concourse a few years ago.

Good news sense has prevailed Would it be possible to build 6 platforms for HS2 as phase 1 of the rebuild on the cleared land to the West of the station with a plan to expand to 10 as part of the wider rebuild of the existing station?

It should have been called the ‘West Coast relief line’ or the ‘West Coast bypass line‘ to show the main focus of the project was on increasing capacity instead of speed.

I understand there is only one relatively short tunnel on the phase 2A section so any cost saving from reducing the diameter would be negligible at best. Also would changing the diameter mean that the TBM’s from phase 1 couldn’t be refurbished and reused so in terms of reducing costs it hardly...

Any construction on NPR isn’t going to begin until the 2030’s, there is still a huge amount of design work which the new government can continue and a hybrid bill to get through Parliament.

I think that is a fair approach but any decision on 2A will have to take into account the cost of alternatives such as upgrades between Handsacre and Crewe

Fair points and Labours plans to decarbonise through renewables will generate jobs and growth. However as has been mentioned uptread the truncation of phase 2A and the capacity bottlenecks on the WCML mean that the Government faces a choice either build 2A as planned or expensive and disruptive...

Not forgetting that Labour have mad achieving economic growth a key part of their economic strategy, but how are they going to achieve that growth if they don‘t invest in schemes like HS2a to deliver it?

It is no secret that Burnham and Starmer don’t get on but he won’t be deselected, he has already been confirmed as candidate for next Mays mayor election. A vote to bar him would have to be made at Labour’s National Executive Committee where Starmer is only one of 39 members and the Unions have...

That is the point though, the Act authorises the purchase of land I can’t understand how the PM can unilaterally decide to override without another vote in Parliament to repeal the Act. A judicial review would also take 9-15 months. I think there is support within Labour for building Phase 2...

You would think the decision would be judicially reviewed, I wouldn’t be surprised if Andy Burnham launched a legal challenge against the land sales for phase 2a Depending on the date of the next election there wouldn’t be much time, even with an Autumn election once the Summer recess happens...