Ok, so here's some economic reality, and some thoughts on HS2
Firstly, cutting HS2 doesn't make any money available anywhere. The £32bn being spent is the same money currently being spent on Crossrail. When crossrail finishes, the annual funding is to switch to HS2. If HS2 is cancelled, that money goes straight back to the treasury. There is no 'cancel HS2 and spend the money on pacer replacement' option. Moreover, within CP5 there is already funding allocated for futher projects, such as pacer replacements. The entire idea, peddled by the NIMBYs that it'd a 'new trains now or HS2 in 15 years' dichotomoy is absolutely false. Cancelling HS2 produces one thing-no HS rail in Britain. No more, no less.
Secondly, the 'we can't afford this' argument is absolute bunkum. Firstly because with the pound being used as a haven currency by the world (along with the Dollar and the Swiss Franc), means our borrowing costs are incredibly low. Also, lenders are incredibly willing to lend money for things that actually produce hard assets at the end of them, such as HS2. Such things are realistic long-term projects which you can collateralise. Lenders do not want to lend to pay for things like welfare payments, because they produce nothing, and can't be collateralised. Loans specifically tied to HS2 will not be hard to come by. The idea of the 'national debt' and comparing it to a household budget may be politically nice, but it's nothing less than economic BS.
As for HS2, I' very much for it. It's all very well saying 'well, there aren't capacity problems off peak', but that's just something that's trivially true, and doesn't speak to the problems HS2 is designed to solve-i.e. the peak capacity problems on the WC, Midland & EC MLs. The simple truth is that there are only so many paths to put trains through, no matter how long or short they are. The associated costs of severe train lengthening makes such projects even less economical as HS2, without producing the journey time savings that HS2 does.
)
