High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[ainsworth74]

A 6 lane motorway is going to be the best part of 4 times the width of a high speed rail line and will in fact be far more noisy than HS2 ever would be.

Yeah well that's just like your opinion man...

 

[stanley T]

So the economics and benefits of this project are being scrutinised and (quite rightly) found wanting. It is now a question of when (not if) it is cancelled. What is stopping that is the loss of governmental face and the U turn involved (although this government is no stranger to U turns).

Cancellation will probably have to wait till after the 2015 election, unless the Lib Dems pull the plug before.

 

[jon0844]

It will go ahead, even if it's subject to further delays and costs.

The nightmare scenario is that it is scaled back in some way to save money, or has to end up with loads of stations built along the line - meaning the costs will rocket even more (but suddenly lose most, if not all, objections from people along the route) and it will be delayed just like most big projects.

But in 50 years time, we can't just be patching up the existing lines unless we've found a way to get everyone off the trains and roads. As they won't be working from home, I can only assume the next plan will be to have sufficient cuts in the NHS that half of us die off.

 

[tbtc]

So the economics and benefits of this project are being scrutinised and (quite rightly) found wanting. It is now a question of when (not if) it is cancelled

The question is, how do we build infrastructure capable of dealing with population growth over the next fifty years.

Suggestions like replacing one First Class carriage on a 390 with a Standard Class one (and adding around a dozen extra seats per train) are just tinkering at the edges.

We need to do something - for all the criticism, HS2 seems the least bad option (of the realistic options)

 

[PR1Berske]

So the economics and benefits of this project are being scrutinised and (quite rightly) found wanting. It is now a question of when (not if) it is cancelled. What is stopping that is the loss of governmental face and the U turn involved (although this government is no stranger to U turns).

Cancellation will probably have to wait till after the 2015 election, unless the Lib Dems pull the plug before.

Oh thank God there's somebody else!

 

[AndyLandy]

I'm sorry but you're missing the whole point here. We should be celebrating the fact that in this country people are able to challenge things that they don't agree with. It would be a sad day if we started to try and force things upon the population without allowing them the right to question those decisions, both through Parliament and the courts.

OK, I didn't see that as the point you were making, but I absolutely agree with you on it. It's definitely one of the best things about this country that we can do stuff like that. Indeed, I think all the antis are wrong, but they all absolutely have a right to say what they believe. I just reserve my right to continue to tell them they're wrong!

 

[Gareth Marston]

The "alternatives" are clear from the real reason of opposition from the disparate and desperate coalition against HS2.

• Keep disproportionate spend of transport infrastructure in London and South East to keep status quo.
• More runways at Heathrow etc to try and resurrect domestic aviation
• More motorways, bypasses and the like to try and resurrect road use which is in decline.
• An economic policy that would make Thatcher look left wing.
• The Daily Telegraph will have to run Diana conspiracy stories in a bid to boost circulation.

The trickle down into the national rail network will be miniscule.

 

[HSTEd]

If HS2 is "cancelled" I imagine it will appear a year or so later as the "North South High Capacity Rail Link".

And be almost indistinguishable.

 

[ainsworth74]

Just regarding that YouGov poll it was done on behalf of the Sunday Times.

 

[joeykins82]

I've started referring to phase 1 as "the West Coast Mainline southern bypass scheme". It's more of a mouthful than HS2 but everyone who I've spoken to who opposed it (except PR1Berske obviously) has changed their mind

 

[jon0844]

I bet most people jumping on the 'scrap HS2' bandwagon know very little about HS2 at all, and so if you just modified all the HS2 documents to give it a new name and said 'This is the new proposal', I bet a lot of them would suddenly think it's great and 'much better than before'.

 

[WatcherZero]

Just look at the way UKIP has become the poster boy of anti-HS2 when in their 2010 manifiesto they were proposing a high speed network three times the size of HS2 calling it not ambitious enough!!!

The publics memory is indeed highly fickle.

 

[Geezertronic]

The government should sell HS2 to the people who live on the commuter path of the WCML South up to Rugby (via Northampton). I bet if they were in possesion of the full facts then they wouldn't be against HS2 if it meant improvements to their daily journey.

The report from LibDemVoice report fails to take into consideration the capacity issues along the WCML South which even an upgrade to 140mph wouldn't solve. Such an upgrade now would mean that the 2x110mph and 1x100mph paths mentioned by Phillip Elliott wouldn't be able to run on the WCML South Fasts amongst the 9 x (upgraded to) 140mph paths so that is actually a loss in capacity (unless someone is going to magic some more 390s from somewhere for LM to have). It also makes no mention of the passenger forecasts having exceeded expectations so how they would address the issue of capacity moving forward without HS2

The comments from PAC fail to address the reasons for the Phase 1 cost increase - mainly that the route has had to be changed to appease NIMBYs. Apart from that it doesn't actually contain a lot of helpful information in the way of actually suggesting alternatives - it just seems like a whinge for the sake of whinging. And they do not address the points that without HS2 there is no money to spend, despite the HS2 announcements the classic network (including WCML) is still receiving sizeable amounts of money for upgrades, and it also makes no mention of the passenger forecasts having exceeded expectations so how they would address the issue of capacity moving forward without HS2

 

[PR1Berske]

I bet most people jumping on the 'scrap HS2' bandwagon know very little about HS2 at all, and so if you just modified all the HS2 documents to give it a new name and said 'This is the new proposal', I bet a lot of them would suddenly think it's great and 'much better than before'.

It says a lot that you have to go into duplicitous and border-line deceptive name-changing just to get something through. It's how "the spare room subsidy"/"bedroom tax" policy gets cheers and boos, and it's purely pathetic to see the pro-HS2 lobby having to lower themselves to a rebrand because so many holes are being found in their proposal.

The PAC report - and I will continue to call them "highly influential" given their role in getting the BBC execs up against the wall yesterday - is a great example of the DfT being shown up for what it is - breathlessly desperate to get this through for purely vanity and show.

If you think that people are going to flock to the scheme just because of "a new name", then that shows me just how pathetic the whole scheme is.

 

[jon0844]

I wasn't actually suggesting a re-brand, just that people would likely support something if it was packaged differently - thus proving the point that most people don't have a clue and just jump on bandwagons.

The 'bedroom tax' is another great example. It's not a tax on a bedroom. Not everyone pays it (yet many people didn't realise that at first when they started jumping on the phrase coined by Labour, which has since admitted it would keep the policy), and it actually serves a valuable purpose (even if the implementation was badly managed). We have many people who live in properties that are now too big (e.g. kids moved away) and many people in properties that are too small. While there are schemes to encourage people to swap, there's still a big (and very real) problem.

 

[PR1Berske]

What is the maximum overall spend at which you would cap HS2 (anyone)?

 

[Geezertronic]

It says a lot that you have to go into duplicitous and border-line deceptive name-changing just to get something through. It's how "the spare room subsidy"/"bedroom tax" policy gets cheers and boos, and it's purely pathetic to see the pro-HS2 lobby having to lower themselves to a rebrand because so many holes are being found in their proposal.

Maybe you need to re-read some of your folly on this thread alone, including your wholly false signature that your account displayed for a while. You are the one whole is resorting to name calling: "ridicule the ridiculous" springs to mind as does your "purely pathetic" comment above. Not once have you presented an alternative to HS2, you're just slating it for your own personal gain

The PAC report - and I will continue to call them "highly influential" given their role in getting the BBC execs up against the wall yesterday - is a great example of the DfT being shown up for what it is - breathlessly desperate to get this through for purely vanity and show.

Again you have made the mistake of believing the vanity and show bile produced by the Anti-Rail brigade (of which you are one). The BBC issue and HS2 are two completely different things and are incomparable

If you think that people are going to flock to the scheme just because of "a new name", then that shows me just how pathetic the whole scheme is.

And there you go again. A post full of folly but still no alternatives... I note your signature contains more emotive folly as well, typical of the Anti-Rail brigade to resort to such means in an effort to push their non point

What is the maximum overall spend at which you would cap HS2 (anyone)?

I would have capped it as £32bn and the NIMBYs would have had to make do without the extra compensation and route alterations which have inflated the price more than anything else

 

[HSTEd]

What is the maximum overall spend at which you would cap HS2 (anyone)?

This is not a simple question.

Once construction is begun you can't simply put a cap on spending and scrap the project half way through construction since you have already sunk billions of pounds.

The effective price to completion of the project becomes its price and you have to continuously readjust BCR calculations.

 

[PR1Berske]

I've given alternatives before - spend much less money more wisely on specific pinch points and modernising equipments/signalling/etc.


As for the PAC bashing, the two examples are rightly joined together. People can't say they're impressed with Margaret Hodge grilling the BBC over multi-million pound golden goodbyes and then say she's wrong to point out errors over HS2, or the DfT's running of it.

Thank you for your answer about the highest amount at which you would cap HS2. I'd be interested to hear what other people say.

 

[jon0844]

I've given alternatives before - spend much less money more wisely on specific pinch points and modernising equipments/signalling/etc.

As for the PAC bashing, the two examples are rightly joined together. People can't say they're impressed with Margaret Hodge grilling the BBC over multi-million pound golden goodbyes and then say she's wrong to point out errors over HS2, or the DfT's running of it.

Thank you for your answer about the highest amount at which you would cap HS2. I'd be interested to hear what other people say.

You haven't actually given alternatives though, you've just given some vague ideas.

If I was a consultant asked to help determine why a website wasn't performing and was asked what I suggest was done, I wouldn't get much work if I just said 'Make it more popular and get more visitors'.

I'd be expected to come up with actual solutions and cost them accordingly, and perhaps then compare with the cost of building a whole new site.

Now I wouldn't expect you to be able to do that, and I am not sure why you think that you could (or are). The thing is, there are people who have clearly spent some considerable time giving lots of reasons why your vague suggestions wouldn't work (remember the £10 to build 5 new stations idea?) and you choose to ignore them, while spending little to no time to counter their arguments beyond just churning out the same stuff.

Your new signature is yet one more example of this laziness and the fact you're obviously messing around and find this whole thing a bit of fun to while away the time.

 

[deltic]

What is the maximum overall spend at which you would cap HS2 (anyone)?

HSTEd gave the correct answer - you should always continue with the scheme as long as the benefit exceeds the cost. Once you start building the sunk cost is irrelevant - its always the cost to complete against the benefit that you need to compare. There is nothing special about a particular number. At present the amount of money being talked about is fairly small £2bn or so a year.

 

[NSEFAN]

I've given alternatives before - spend much less money more wisely on specific pinch points and modernising equipments/signalling/etc.

How do you know that that would give the same improvement as building a new line? Do bear in mind that the point of HS2 is to provide long-term capacity, whereas improving the current line on its own can't do this.

Do you believe that the capacity improvement that HS2 offers won't be needed at all, ever? If so why not?

 

[AndyLandy]

What is the maximum overall spend at which you would cap HS2 (anyone)?

How do we even know what's good value for money?

What's to say that even if HS2 costs us £100bn, it's still worth investing in for that amount of money.

What if we could somehow have HS2 completely free of charge? That would have to be a worthwhile investment. A whole new railway, with a fleet of 250mph trains, for nothing at all. Who'd be against that?

The problem, as I've always seen it, is that the equivalent levels of investment in the classic network wouldn't give nearly as good results as HS2 will.

 

[jon0844]

Most upgrades for the existing network are to keep up with growing capacity demands now, not 20-30 years from now. As is usually the case, many are already late and needed to be done many years ago.

If we don't build HS2, we'll never be able to start working on other new high-capacity lines for other parts of the UK, such as the south west.

It might be hard for Joe Public to imagine the demand of the railway network in 20-30 years, but with such a big project you can't really wait until the demand is there and say 'don't worry, give us 20 years and we'll fix it'.

It's bad enough waiting for improvements in the next timetable change or two, and people are always moaning about crowded trains.

 

[deltic]

How do we even know what's good value for money?

What's to say that even if HS2 costs us £100bn, it's still worth investing in for that amount of money.

What if we could somehow have HS2 completely free of charge? That would have to be a worthwhile investment. A whole new railway, with a fleet of 250mph trains, for nothing at all. Who'd be against that?

The problem, as I've always seen it, is that the equivalent levels of investment in the classic network wouldn't give nearly as good results as HS2 will.

The revised business and strategic case for HS2 will be presented at the deposit of the Hybrid Bill - I would expect benefits in the order of £100bn against costs of £50bn. In addition there are other benefits (and some costs) which are not captured by the present appraisal scheme. A forthcoming KPMG report suggests these benefits could equate to 400,000 jobs (trailed in the Daily Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ercity-trains-without-HS2-ministers-told.html)

 

[tbtc]

I've given alternatives before - spend much less money more wisely on specific pinch points and modernising equipments/signalling/etc

You said that you'd build a railway from Blackpool to Sunderland, but I don't remember any specifics. Would love to hear more, of course...

You want to relieve pinch points and invest more in the "regions" (to tackle that London-mafia conspiracy)? One of the biggest pinch points outside London is obviously 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly - apart from "metro" operations like Merseyrail these are possibly the busiest platforms in terms of departures/ passenger volumes in northern England.

So, surely anyone would want to build parallel platforms there to tackle this bottleneck? I mean, you'd have to knock a pub down, but apart from that...

Any more ideas?

 

[PR1Berske]

HSTEd gave the correct answer - you should always continue with the scheme as long as the benefit exceeds the cost. Once you start building the sunk cost is irrelevant - its always the cost to complete against the benefit that you need to compare. There is nothing special about a particular number. At present the amount of money being talked about is fairly small £2bn or so a year.

That's an interesting response. The cost/benefit ratio has fallen as well as risen during the re-evaluating of the overall cost (if I can use a pro-HS2 euphemism). It may fall again, and I would be interested to observe what happens to the scheme as it does so.

Whenever large schemes begin to encroach or completely crash through their budgets - parts of the Olympics, the Wembley rebuild, the Scottish Parliament - cynicism and suspicion grows.

Your new signature is yet one more example of this laziness and the fact you're obviously messing around and find this whole thing a bit of fun to while away the time.

What's interesting about this response, and your referring to Joe Public just not getting it (how dare they!), is an implication, very subtle but there, of an intolerance against anybody from outside the industry having their say on the project, as though it has to be from within the rail community or nothing at all (is that why you are dismissive of the PAC?)

I'm against HS2 over on a politics forum - http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/1393/hs2?page=18 - and can see from the comments sections underneath news stories and on Twitter that "Joe Public" are against it too by a slight but notable majority.

You're right, I'll give you that, that Joe Public can't see into the future. But they care about the pound in their pocket being spent right, and that will resonate far more loudly than whatever benefits are being spouted this week. If "Joe Public" only read and hear "faster journey times into London" on their local news broadcasts, don't blame them for not supporting you.

 

[tbtc]

What's interesting about this response, and your referring to Joe Public just not getting it (how dare they!), is an implication, very subtle but there, of an intolerance against anybody from outside the industry having their say on the project, as though it has to be from within the rail community or nothing at all (is that why you are dismissive of the PAC?)

Yes, its all an industry-conspiracy

I'm against HS2 over on a politics forum - http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/1393/hs2?page=18 - and can see from the comments sections underneath news stories and on Twitter that "Joe Public" are against it too by a slight but notable majority

As previously explained, the 55% against it now are a lower number than the 64% previously against it.

Not surprising that some people are against it, given the way its been portrayed in the media and the amount of untruths (e.g. those people who believe it won't go north of Birmingham) - it's a project a long time in the future with little benefit until then - and a lot of people don't appreciate all of the work planned for CP5 which will solve many simpler issues sooner.

 

[jon0844]

What's interesting about this response, and your referring to Joe Public just not getting it (how dare they!), is an implication, very subtle but there, of an intolerance against anybody from outside the industry having their say on the project, as though it has to be from within the rail community or nothing at all (is that why you are dismissive of the PAC?)

I'm Joe Public. I am not part of any conspiracy, but I've taken the time to take an interest and learn why HS2 (and many other projects) are necessary.

You get told the same information but ignore it and then change your signature to some other wind-up. And you keep jumping on me for saying the T-word but it's still pretty clear that's what you do most of the time.

Joe Public don't understand HS2. They don't need to. They've not taken any interest in it, can't fully appreciate what it is, where it goes, when it will be built or whether the costs of building it per year are any higher than other existing projects etc.

But you can still ask them for an opinion and if you didn't know, but knew everyone was talking about it being massively over budget already (as if it's already started construction) then you'd say you were against it. I know I would if I was totally clueless on the subject.

The job is to at least educate people and THEN ask them again. I think that if done properly, most people will. Certainly the NIMBYs will drop their own objections if they can secure more compensation, you can be sure of that.

 

[TheKnightWho]

It says a lot that you have to go into duplicitous and border-line deceptive name-changing just to get something through. It's how "the spare room subsidy"/"bedroom tax" policy gets cheers and boos, and it's purely pathetic to see the pro-HS2 lobby having to lower themselves to a rebrand because so many holes are being found in their proposal.

The PAC report - and I will continue to call them "highly influential" given their role in getting the BBC execs up against the wall yesterday - is a great example of the DfT being shown up for what it is - breathlessly desperate to get this through for purely vanity and show.

If you think that people are going to flock to the scheme just because of "a new name", then that shows me just how pathetic the whole scheme is.

Actually, it's much more indicative of there being holes in the objections, surely, if they magically disappear with a rename?

That's an interesting response. The cost/benefit ratio has fallen as well as risen during the re-evaluating of the overall cost (if I can use a pro-HS2 euphemism). It may fall again, and I would be interested to observe what happens to the scheme as it does so.

Whenever large schemes begin to encroach or completely crash through their budgets - parts of the Olympics, the Wembley rebuild, the Scottish Parliament - cynicism and suspicion grows.



What's interesting about this response, and your referring to Joe Public just not getting it (how dare they!), is an implication, very subtle but there, of an intolerance against anybody from outside the industry having their say on the project, as though it has to be from within the rail community or nothing at all (is that why you are dismissive of the PAC?)

I'm against HS2 over on a politics forum - http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/1393/hs2?page=18 - and can see from the comments sections underneath news stories and on Twitter that "Joe Public" are against it too by a slight but notable majority.

You're right, I'll give you that, that Joe Public can't see into the future. But they care about the pound in their pocket being spent right, and that will resonate far more loudly than whatever benefits are being spouted this week. If "Joe Public" only read and hear "faster journey times into London" on their local news broadcasts, don't blame them for not supporting you.

I do find it curious how you invariably concentrate on the arguments given that are the least relevant to the discussion, and the easiest to become personally offended by. It's almost as though you don't like answering difficult questions, such as giving reasonable alternatives, and those that call you out on your NIMBYism with a certain pub in Manchester.